Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. KRYS scored 70.7, INVA scored 76.1 — INVA leads.
Compare another set
KRYS
Krystal Biotech, Inc.
Biotechnology · Quality-Growth
70.7
$331.61 · $9.8B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
5.4
INVA leads
INVA
Innoviva, Inc.
Biotechnology · Quality-Growth
76.1
$21.21 · $1.5B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestINVA5.0x
Fastest growthKRYS+22.6%
Strongest balance sheetKRYS0.01
Highest qualityKRYS70 / 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)
KRYS
stronger →← stronger
INVA
70
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
67
91
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
71
55
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
92
KRYS is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
KRYS
INVA
$258mC
FCF
$189mC
+22.6%A-
Rev
+18.8%B+
0.01A
D/E
0.27B
41.6xC
P/E
5.0xA
2.10C
PEG
3.12D
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
KRYS
INVA
77% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
54% below
~28%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-11%/yr
-55%
1-yr DCF upside
+97%
-43%
5-yr DCF upside
+117%
-22%
10-yr DCF upside
+150%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
KRYS
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
INVA
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
The companies
KRYSKrystal Biotech, Inc.
Biotechnology · $331.61 · beta 0.50
Why now
Biotechnology · market cap $9.8b. 13% off the 52-week high of $382.54. Revenue growing +23%, comfortably above the S&P median. 9 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $392.11 (implying +18% upside).
Moat
Net margin 55% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 18% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 107% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Trailing P/E 42x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. P/S 22.3x embeds aggressive forward growth — disappointing top-line guidance would compress the multiple hard. Patent cliff exposure — a single approved molecule can carry the company; when patent protection expires, generic / biosimilar competition can erase 80% of the revenue in 2-3 years.
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.
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 KRYS and INVA diverge
On the headline score the gap is 5.4 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.
ValueKRYS 55.3 · INVA 91.9INVA +36.6
GrowthKRYS 91.1 · INVA 71.2KRYS +19.9
QualityKRYS 70.2 · INVA 67.4level
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 KRYS the better stock?
INVA scores higher: INVA 76.1, KRYS 70.7 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 KRYS differ most?
The widest gap is value, where INVA leads by 37 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 KRYS 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.