ALNY vs. GH: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison
UpdatedHere’s a clear look at ALNY and GH, comparing key factors like performance, valuation metrics, dividends, and financial strength. It’s built for investors or anyone curious to see how these two stocks match up.
Company Overview
ALNY dominates in value with a market cap of 38.15 billion USD, eclipsing GH’s 4.60 billion USD by roughly 8.30×.
GH carries a higher beta at 1.49, indicating it’s more sensitive to market moves, while ALNY remains steadier at 0.17.
| Symbol | ALNY | GH |
|---|---|---|
| Company Name | Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc. | Guardant Health, Inc. |
| Country | US | US |
| Sector | Healthcare | Healthcare |
| Industry | Biotechnology | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| CEO | Dr. Yvonne L. Greenstreet M.B.A., M.D. | Dr. Helmy Eltoukhy Ph.D. |
| Price | 292.58 USD | 37.09 USD |
| Market Cap | 38.15 billion USD | 4.60 billion USD |
| Beta | 0.17 | 1.49 |
| Exchange | NASDAQ | NASDAQ |
| IPO Date | June 1, 2004 | October 4, 2018 |
| ADR | No | No |
Performance Comparison
This chart compares the performance of ALNY and GH over the past year by tracking the growth of an initial $10,000 investment in each (starting one year ago).
Hover over the lines to see the investment’s value and total return (%) at specific dates.
Data is adjusted for dividends and splits.
Valuation Metrics Comparison
The section examines key financial ratios to assess the valuation of ALNY and GH based on earnings, cash flow, sales, and book value. Pay attention to the following notable points where extreme values stand out.
- Neither ALNY nor GH turned a profit—both carry negative P/E ratios of -140.68 and -11.03, underscoring continued losses that pressure their valuations.
- ALNY posts a negative forward PEG of -38.16, hinting at anticipated earnings decline, whereas GH at 0.46 has projections for stable or growing earnings.
- GH carries a sub-zero price-to-book ratio of -18.32, indicating negative equity. In contrast, ALNY (P/B 328.68) has positive book value.
- ALNY and GH both consumed more free cash flow than they generated last year—P/FCF of -506.05 and -15.07, respectively—highlighting persistent liquidity pressure.
| Symbol | ALNY | GH |
|---|---|---|
| Price-to-Earnings Ratio (P/E, TTM) | -140.68 | -11.03 |
| Forward PEG Ratio (TTM) | -38.16 | 0.46 |
| Price-to-Sales Ratio (P/S, TTM) | 16.25 | 5.94 |
| Price-to-Book Ratio (P/B, TTM) | 328.68 | -18.32 |
| Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (P/FCF, TTM) | -506.05 | -15.07 |
| EV-to-EBITDA (TTM) | -251.73 | -13.08 |
| EV-to-Sales (TTM) | 16.37 | 6.72 |
| EV-to-Free Cash Flow (TTM) | -509.80 | -17.07 |
Dividend Comparison
Neither ALNY nor GH currently pays a dividend yield; this often indicates they are reinvesting earnings for growth, prioritizing long-term expansion over immediate cash returns to shareholders.
| Symbol | ALNY | GH |
|---|---|---|
| Dividend Yield (TTM) | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Financial Strength Metrics Comparison
This section dives into the financial resilience of ALNY and GH, spotlighting key metrics like liquidity, leverage, and debt coverage. Check out the standout observations below where notable differences or extremes pop up.
- ALNY carries high leverage (debt-to-equity ratio 11.28), whereas GH has negative equity (-5.21), each presenting distinct capital-structure concerns.
- GH carries a debt-to-assets ratio of 0.97, suggesting substantial asset funding via debt, while ALNY at 0.31 opts for a more conservative financing structure.
- Both ALNY and GH report negative interest coverage ratios (-0.79, -166.83), meaning EBIT itself is negative—neither can cover interest, a critical solvency warning.
| Symbol | ALNY | GH |
|---|---|---|
| Current Ratio (TTM) | 3.04 | 4.11 |
| Quick Ratio (TTM) | 2.98 | 3.76 |
| Debt-to-Equity Ratio (TTM) | 11.28 | -5.21 |
| Debt-to-Assets Ratio (TTM) | 0.31 | 0.97 |
| Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) | -0.79 | -166.83 |