Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. INVA scored 76.1, EXEL scored 75.4 — INVA leads.
Compare another set
INVA
Innoviva, Inc.
Biotechnology · Quality-Growth
76.1
$21.21 · $1.5B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
0.7
INVA leads
EXEL
Exelixis, Inc.
Biotechnology · Quality-Growth
75.4
$59.86 · $14.8B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestINVA5.0x
Fastest growthINVA+18.8%
Strongest balance sheetEXEL0.09
Highest qualityEXEL97 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueINVA-54%
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)
INVA
stronger →← stronger
EXEL
67
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
97
71
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
72
92
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
62
INVA and EXEL split the three pillars evenly.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
INVA
EXEL
$189mC
FCF
$1.2bC+
+18.8%B+
Rev
+7.0%C+
0.27B
D/E
0.09B+
5.0xA
P/E
18.9xA-
3.12D
PEG
2.56C
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
INVA
EXEL
54% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
37% below
~-11%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~0%/yr
+97%
1-yr DCF upside
+32%
+117%
5-yr DCF upside
+60%
+150%
10-yr DCF upside
+109%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
INVA
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
EXEL
Why this score
Buying back stock
Durable high returns
The companies
INVAInnoviva, Inc.
Biotechnology · $21.21 · beta 0.38
Why now
Biotechnology · market cap $1.5b. 16% off the 52-week high of $25.15. Revenue growing +19%, comfortably above the S&P median. 5 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $35.00 (implying +65% upside).
Moat
Net margin 81% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 29% — 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
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.
EXELExelixis, Inc.
Biotechnology · $59.86 · beta 0.47
Why now
Biotechnology · market cap $14.8b. Trading near 52-week high of $61.14 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. 15 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $54.87 (implying -8% upside).
Moat
Net margin 35% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 44% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 135% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Trading within 2% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. 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.
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 INVA and EXEL diverge
On the headline score the gap is 0.7 points in favor of INVA. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
ValueINVA 91.9 · EXEL 61.8INVA +30.1
QualityINVA 67.4 · EXEL 96.6EXEL +29.2
GrowthINVA 71.2 · EXEL 71.7level
Pillars run 0–100. Value is judged against each company's own sector, so a Value 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.
Common questions
Is INVA or EXEL the better stock?
INVA scores higher: INVA 76.1, EXEL 75.4 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
Where do INVA and EXEL differ most?
The widest gap is value, where INVA leads by 30 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. Neither name sweeps: they trade the lead across the three pillars, so the comparison is a trade-off rather than one being better on every measure.
How are INVA and EXEL scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.