Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ONC scored 67.8, HALO scored 83.1 — HALO leads.
Compare another set
ONC
BeOne Medicines AG
Biotechnology · Quality-Growth
67.8
$354.47 · $40.3B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
15.3
HALO leads
HALO
Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.
Biotechnology · Quality-Growth
83.1
$110.42 · $12.5B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestHALO32.3x
Fastest growthHALO+41.2%
Highest qualityHALO89 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueHALO-40%
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)
ONC
stronger →← stronger
HALO
60
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
89
95
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
98
54
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
66
HALO is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
ONC
HALO
$1.3bC+
FCF
$806mC+
+34.3%A
Rev
+41.2%A
0.40B
D/E
—
63.4xC
P/E
32.3xC+
0.74A-
PEG
1.47B
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
ONC
HALO
10% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
40% below
~12%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~2%/yr
-15%
1-yr DCF upside
+27%
+12%
5-yr DCF upside
+66%
+68%
10-yr DCF upside
+146%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
ONC
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
HALO
Why this score
Buying back stock
Durable high returns
The companies
ONCBeOne Medicines AG
Biotechnology · $354.47 · beta 0.61
Why now
Biotechnology · market cap $40.3b. 8% off the 52-week high of $385.22. Revenue growing +34% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.74 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 27 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $435.53 (implying +23% upside).
Moat
ROE 13% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income, mostly because of stock-based pay ($525m) — a real cost to shareholders, paid in shares rather than cash. 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
Trailing P/E 63.4x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. 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.
HALOHalozyme Therapeutics, Inc.
Biotechnology · $110.42 · beta 0.88
Why now
Biotechnology · market cap $12.5b. 6% off the 52-week high of $116.85. Revenue growing +41% — in hypergrowth territory. 8 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $101.75 (implying -8% upside).
Moat
Net margin 25% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. FCF converts 195% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash. 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
Trailing P/E 32x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. 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 ONC and HALO diverge
On the headline score the gap is 15.3 points in favor of HALO. The widest single difference is Quality, where HALO leads by 28.5 points.
QualityONC 60.4 · HALO 88.9HALO +28.5
ValueONC 54.4 · HALO 65.9HALO +11.5
GrowthONC 95.0 · HALO 98.0HALO +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 HALO or ONC the better stock?
HALO scores higher: HALO 83.1, ONC 67.8 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 HALO and ONC differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where HALO leads by 29 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. HALO leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are HALO and ONC 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.