Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. PAHC scored 70.7, VTRS scored 35.9 — PAHC leads.
Compare another set
PAHC
Phibro Animal Health Corporation
Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic · Quality-Growth
70.7
$38.30 · $1.6B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
34.8
PAHC leads
VTRS
Viatris Inc.
Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic · Quality-Growth
35.9
$17.64 · $20.3B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Fastest growthPAHC+17.1%
Strongest balance sheetVTRS0.96
Highest qualityPAHC61 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueVTRS-39%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
PAHC
stronger →← stronger
VTRS
61
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
39
81
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
42
72
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
28
PAHC is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
PAHC
VTRS
$10mC-
FCF
$2.0bC+
+17.1%B+
Rev
+4.4%C+
2.06D
D/E
0.96C
15.8xA-
P/E
—
1.68C+
PEG
3.17D
—
P/S
1.4xA-
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
PAHC
VTRS
773% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
39% below
>60%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-7%/yr
-90%
1-yr DCF upside
+62%
-89%
5-yr DCF upside
+63%
-86%
10-yr DCF upside
+65%
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.
Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic · market cap $1.6b. Down 36% from 52-week high of $60.08 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +17%, comfortably above the S&P median. 4 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $44.00 (implying +15% upside).
Moat
ROE 26% — 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
D/E 2.06 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Down 36% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. 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.
Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic · market cap $20.3b. 4% off the 52-week high of $18.43. 10 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $19.70 (implying +12% 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
Currently unprofitable (margin -23.9%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk. ROE -25% is below the long-run sustainable threshold of ~10% — capital efficiency would need to improve for the equity base to compound at the market rate. 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.
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 PAHC and VTRS diverge
On the headline score the gap is 34.8 points in favor of PAHC. The widest single difference is Value, where PAHC leads by 43.4 points.
ValuePAHC 71.7 · VTRS 28.3PAHC +43.4
GrowthPAHC 80.6 · VTRS 42.1PAHC +38.5
QualityPAHC 61.2 · VTRS 38.9PAHC +22.3
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 PAHC or VTRS the better stock?
PAHC scores higher: PAHC 70.7, VTRS 35.9 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 PAHC and VTRS differ most?
The widest gap is value, where PAHC leads by 43 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. PAHC leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are PAHC and VTRS 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.