COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
AUPH vs INCY
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. AUPH scored 72.6, INCY scored 70.6 — AUPH leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. AUPH's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but INCY's are as of March 2026 — a 3-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
AUPH
Aurinia Pharmaceuticals Inc.
72.6
$16.65 · $2.2B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
2.0
AUPH leads
INCY
Incyte Corporation
70.6
$127.81 · $25.9B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestAUPH7.3x
- Fastest growthINCY+21.5%
- Strongest balance sheetINCY0.01
- Highest qualityINCY84 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueINCY-52%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
AUPH
stronger →← stronger
INCY
74
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
84
60
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
83
86
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
51
INCY is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
AUPH
INCY
$175mC
FCF
$1.9bC+
+20.4%A-
Rev
+21.5%A-
0.10B+
D/E
0.01A
7.3xA
P/E
16.3xA-
0.58A-
PEG
30.60D
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
AUPH
INCY
9% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
52% below
~6%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-3%/yr
-3%
1-yr DCF upside
+59%
+10%
5-yr DCF upside
+110%
+30%
10-yr DCF upside
+219%
These two disagree on this pair: the Value pillar ranks cheapness against sector peers, while price-vs-fair-value is an absolute read. A name can be the better value in its sector and still the dearer one on cash flows.
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
AUPH
Why this score
- Earnings outpace cash
INCY
Why this score
- Diluting shareholders
The companies
AUPHAurinia Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Why now
Biotechnology · market cap $2.2b. 14% off the 52-week high of $19.25. Revenue growing +20%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.58 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 6 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $18.17 (implying +9% upside).
Moat
ROE 51% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. Pharma moat is patent runway + pipeline depth — a single approved molecule funds the next generation of bets. Late-stage trials carry binary readouts that swing valuation 30%+.
Risk
Beta 1.40 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. Trial-readout binary — late-stage clinical trials carry approve/reject outcomes that swing valuation 30%+; the equity is effectively a portfolio of these binary events, not a steady cash-flow business.
INCYIncyte Corporation
Why now
Biotechnology · market cap $25.9b. 4% off the 52-week high of $132.60. Revenue growing +21%, comfortably above the S&P median. 23 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $126.04 (implying -1% upside).
Moat
Net margin 27% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 25% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 132% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Reimbursement risk — even an approved drug can fail commercially if payors don't reimburse; pricing pressure from Medicare and large PBMs has been accelerating since 2024.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where AUPH and INCY diverge
On the headline score the gap is 2.0 points in favor of AUPH. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- ValueAUPH 85.7 · INCY 51.0AUPH +34.7
- GrowthAUPH 60.3 · INCY 82.6INCY +22.3
- QualityAUPH 74.0 · INCY 83.7INCY +9.7
Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.