Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. NTLA scored 19.2, INVA scored 76.1 — INVA leads.
Compare another set
NTLA
Intellia Therapeutics, Inc.
Biotechnology · Quality-Growth
19.2
$13.07 · $1.8B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
56.9
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
Fastest growthINVA+18.8%
Strongest balance sheetNTLA0.10
Highest qualityINVA67 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueINVA-54%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
NTLA
stronger →← stronger
INVA
21
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
67
68
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
71
5
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
92
INVA is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
NTLA
INVA
-$349mF
FCF
$189mC
+16.9%B+
Rev
+18.8%B+
0.10B+
D/E
0.27B
30.8xD
P/S
—
—
PEG
3.12D
—
P/E
5.0xA
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
NTLA
INVA
—
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
54% below
—
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-11%/yr
—
1-yr DCF upside
+97%
—
5-yr DCF upside
+117%
—
10-yr DCF upside
+150%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
NTLA
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
INVA
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
The companies
NTLAIntellia Therapeutics, Inc.
Biotechnology · $13.07 · beta 1.80
Why now
Biotechnology · market cap $1.8b. Down 54% from 52-week high of $28.25 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +17%, comfortably above the S&P median. 18 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $23.11 (implying +77% upside).
Moat
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
Free cash flow is negative (-$349m) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk. Down 54% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 1.80 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return.
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 NTLA and INVA diverge
On the headline score the gap is 56.9 points in favor of INVA. The widest single difference is Value, where INVA leads by 86.9 points.
ValueNTLA 5.0 · INVA 91.9INVA +86.9
QualityNTLA 20.9 · INVA 67.4INVA +46.5
GrowthNTLA 68.2 · INVA 71.2INVA +3.0
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 NTLA the better stock?
INVA scores higher: INVA 76.1, NTLA 19.2 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 NTLA differ most?
The widest gap is value, where INVA leads by 87 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. INVA leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are INVA and NTLA 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.