Exelixis vs Neurocrine Biosciences
Add, change or remove companies; up to four.
KIRA’s take AI analyst
I put Exelixis and Neurocrine Biosciences side by side, using each one’s latest annual report. Here is what stands out:
- Neurocrine Biosciences is the larger business, with $2.9B of revenue in fiscal 2025 against $2.3B for Exelixis.
- Neurocrine Biosciences grew revenue faster (21.5%, against 7.0%).
- Exelixis kept more of each dollar of sales as operating profit (37.6% operating margin, against 21.6%).
- Exelixis turned more of its sales into free cash flow (37.8% FCF margin, against 26.2%).
- Exelixis earned a higher return on the capital invested in it (64.9%, against 25.6%).
- Investors pay more for each dollar of Neurocrine Biosciences’s earnings: a P/E of 21.4x against 20.5x for Exelixis.
Who comes out ahead
Of the 11 measures where higher (or lower) is clearly better, how many each company leads.
Exelixis
EXEL
6/11
Operating marginNet marginFCF marginReturn on capitalReturn on equityShare count change
Neurocrine Biosciences
NBIX
4/11
Revenue growth5-year growthGross marginNet debt / EBITDA
Side by side
Best in the row
| Latest fiscal year | EXEL FY25 | NBIX FY25 |
|---|---|---|
| Size | ||
| Market cap | $16.9B | $15.2B |
| Revenue | $2.3B | $2.9B |
| Free cash flow | $876M | $749M |
| Net income | $783M | $479M |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth | 7.0% | 21.5% |
| 5-year growth | 18.6% | 22.3% |
| Share count change | −4.8% | −1.2% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 96.4% | 98.2% |
| Operating margin | 37.6% | 21.6% |
| Net margin | 33.7% | 16.7% |
| FCF margin | 37.8% | 26.2% |
| Return on capital | 64.9% | 25.6% |
| Return on equity | 35.5% | 16.4% |
| Balance sheet | ||
| Net debt | −$1.1B | −$1.5B |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −1.2x | −2.3x |
| Dividends and buybacks | $948M | $168M |
| Valuation & quality | ||
| P/E | 20.5x | 21.4x |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
Ten years
Revenue
Operating margin
Free cash flow
Return on capital
Each company's latest fiscal year; fiscal years end in different months. The best value in each row is highlighted where higher (or lower) is clearly better. Not investment advice.