NVCR vs BEAM Stock Comparison: AI Score, Valuation, Performance and Upside
NVCR is a commercial-stage medical device company generating revenue from its TTFields cancer therapy platform while pursuing clinical expansion into larger cancer markets, while BEAM is a preclinical/early-clinical gene editing biotech with no approved products but a promising precision editing technology. These represent different stages of biomedical innovation investment.
NVCR vs BEAM contrasts a commercial medical device company expanding its cancer therapy into new indications against a precision gene editing biotech pursuing curative therapies for genetic diseases, both representing frontier biomedical technologies.
NVCR holds the edge across 3 of 5 key metrics in this comparison. BEAM has delivered stronger 1-year price return (+100.94% vs -15.00%), though NVCR trades at the lower forward P/E (-11.97x vs -7.20x). Analyst consensus implies meaningfully more upside for NVCR (+82.07%) than for BEAM (+49.58%).
- →Want commercial biomedical innovation exposure with existing revenue from approved GBM and mesothelioma indications
- →See the EF-32 lung cancer trial as a high-value clinical binary catalyst that could dramatically expand the addressable market
- →Value TTFields' additive mechanism as combining with existing cancer therapies rather than replacing them, reducing adoption hurdles
- →Want early-stage exposure to base editing gene therapy technology with potential for curative treatments in genetic diseases
- →Value Beam's proprietary base editing chemistry as a differentiated precision approach versus traditional CRISPR cutting
- →Are comfortable with clinical-stage biotechnology risk and long development timelines in exchange for potentially transformative disease-modifying therapy potential
| Metric | NVCR | BEAM |
|---|---|---|
| AI score | 34.0 | 33.2 |
| AI rank | #1808 | #1942 |
| Latest close | $14.28 | $34.14 |
| 1M return | -16.05% | +29.66% |
| 6M return | +15.82% | +33.36% |
| 1Y return | -15.00% | +100.94% |
How much would $10,000 be worth today if invested at the start of each period, with all dividends reinvested?
| Period | NVCR | BEAM |
|---|---|---|
| 1Y ago | $8.5K (-15.0%) started 2025-06-18 | $20.09K (+100.9%) started 2025-06-18 |
| 5Y ago | $654.93 (-93.5%) started 2021-06-18 | $4.02K (-59.8%) started 2021-06-18 |
| 10Y ago | $12.24K (+22.4%) started 2016-06-20 | $18.21K (+82.1%) started 2020-02-06 |
Hypothetical — past performance does not guarantee future results.
| Metric | NVCR | BEAM |
|---|---|---|
| Market cap | $1.65B | $3.51B |
| Trailing P/E | N/A | N/A |
| Forward P/E | -11.97 | -7.20 |
| Price/Sales | 2.45 | 21.42 |
| EV/Revenue | 2.71 | 12.95 |
| Analyst target | $26.00 | $51.07 |
| Target upside | +82.07% | +49.58% |
| Metric | NVCR | BEAM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth | 12.30% | 324.90% |
| Earnings growth | N/A | N/A |
| EPS growth | N/A | N/A |
| FCF margin | +0.75% | -142.40% |
| Operating margin | N/A | N/A |
| Profit margin | -25.66% | -40.23% |
| ROIC proxy | -49.96% | -5.77% |
| Return on equity | -49.96% | -5.77% |
| Dividend yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Beta | 0.92 | 2.20 |
| Debt/equity | 71.04 | 21.54 |
| Current ratio | 2.90 | 16.99 |
| Quick ratio | 2.66 | 16.25 |
Lower drawdown and smaller single-period drops generally indicate a smoother ride, though they do not guarantee lower future risk.
| Period | Metric | NVCR | BEAM |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1Y | Growth | -15.00% | +100.94% |
| CAGR | -15.01% | +101.04% | |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.10 | 1.24 | |
| Max drawdown | 45.67% | 38.15% | |
| Max daily drop | 24.05% | 10.48% | |
| Max wkly drop | 33.56% | 16.62% | |
| 5Y | Growth | -93.45% | -59.84% |
| CAGR | -42.03% | -16.68% | |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.35 | 0.08 | |
| Max drawdown | 95.55% | 89.12% | |
| Max daily drop | 43.04% | 19.32% | |
| Max wkly drop | 46.39% | 31.25% | |
| 10Y | Growth | +22.37% | +82.08% |
| CAGR | +2.04% | +9.88% | |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.32 | 0.46 | |
| Max drawdown | 95.55% | 89.12% | |
| Max daily drop | 43.04% | 23.42% | |
| Max wkly drop | 46.39% | 41.11% |
| Category | NVCR | BEAM |
|---|---|---|
| Company | NovoCure Limited | Beam Therapeutics Inc. |
| Sector | Health Care - Medical Devices / Oncology | Health Care - Biotechnology / Gene Editing |
| Industry | N/A | N/A |
| Core business | NovoCure's Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) technology delivers alternating electric fields to tumors using wearable devices, disrupting cancer cell division. It's commercially approved for glioblastoma (GBM) and mesothelioma, with clinical trials in lung cancer, pancreatic cancer, and other solid tumors. | Beam Therapeutics is developing base editing medicines — a next-generation gene editing approach that makes precise single-letter changes to DNA rather than causing double-strand cuts — for genetic blood diseases (sickle cell, beta-thalassemia) and liver diseases. |
| Investor focus | Investors track NovoCure's active patient count growth, net revenue per patient, payer coverage expansion (particularly commercial insurance in the U.S. and country approvals internationally), and the EF-32 lung cancer trial result as the most important pipeline catalyst. | Investors track Beam's clinical trial progress in hematological diseases (BEAM-101, BEAM-102), base editing safety and efficacy data, manufacturing platform development, and the company's cash position relative to its development timeline. |
- →Commercial revenue from two approved indications (GBM and MPM) provides a foundation while pipeline trials proceed in larger cancer indications
- →Lung cancer (EF-32 trial) represents a massive expansion opportunity — lung cancer is among the most common cancers globally with limited breakthrough therapies
- →TTFields mechanism is additive to chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and radiation — potential combinations multiply indication opportunities
- →Base editing technology makes more precise DNA edits than traditional CRISPR — changing individual DNA letters rather than cutting and rejoining, potentially reducing off-target editing risks
- →Sickle cell disease and beta-thalassemia are large, well-validated genetic disease targets where gene editing has shown dramatic clinical benefit
- →Proprietary base editing chemistry provides intellectual property foundation and potential for multiple disease applications
- →GBM is a rare cancer — the approved market size limits total addressable revenue without successful expansion into larger cancer indications
- →EF-32 lung cancer trial failure would be a major setback to the investment thesis centered on market expansion
- →Payer reimbursement challenges for TTFields outside the U.S. and Medicare GBM coverage slow international revenue growth
- →Base editing and CRISPR are pre-revenue biotechnology technologies — Beam has no approved products and uncertain commercialization timelines
- →Clinical trial safety data are critical — gene editing therapies must demonstrate no significant off-target editing effects
- →Competition from Vertex/CRISPR Therapeutics (Casgevy) and Bluebird Bio (Lyfgenia) which already have approved sickle cell therapies
Want deeper AI forecasts?
This comparison page is public and free forever. Subscribers can unlock saved watchlists, full AI rankings, detailed forecasts, and interactive analysis tools.