Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Novavax, Inc.
How Novavax, Inc. stacks up
NVAX · against 403 other Healthcare companies of similar size
Growth
0/ 100
Near the bottom of its peers.
Ranked #402 of 404 · scores higher than 0% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the growth score32 peers with a growth score of 0–9, including NVAX · Click a bar to see the companies
Why growth scores 0?
Weighted metrics compared with all Healthcare companies.Mainly because of its 3-year revenue growth and revenue growth, which are weaker than most Healthcare peers.
- slower revenue growth over three years: weaker than 97% of peers. 3-year revenue growth: -36.3% vs peer median 5.8%
- slower revenue growth over the last year: weaker than 96% of peers. Revenue growth: -61.6% vs peer median 6.1%
- Earnings per share growth is not reported, so it is left out of the score.
Metric by metric
Position: dot = NVAX, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | NVAX | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue growthHigher is better · 407 reported | -61.6% | 6.0% | 3% | 33% | |
| Earnings per share growthHigher is better · 220 reported | Not reported | 8.3% | — | — | 33% |
| 3-year revenue growthHigher is better · 396 reported | -36.3% | 6.9% | 3% | 33% |
A metric that is not reported is left out of the score; the other weights are rescaled.
Ranking by growth score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around NVAX| Rank | Company | Market cap | Growth | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 8.9B HKD (≈$1.1B) | 99 | 61 | |
| 1 | 1.4B USD | 99 | 73 | |
| 1 | 27.6B SEK (≈$2.8B) | 99 | 76 | |
| 1 | 2.1B USD | 99 | 96 | |
| 1 | 2.8B USD | 99 | 51 | |
| 397 | 7.5B CNY (≈$1.1B) | 2 | 26 | |
| 397 | 1.3B USD | 2 | 27 | |
| 401 | 12.7B CNY (≈$1.8B) | 1 | 20 | |
| 402 | 2.3B USD | 0 | 25 | |
| 402 | 1.6B USD | 0 | 7 | |
| 402 | 1.2B USD | 0 | 21 |
Scores are sector-relative percentiles from the latest snapshot, always calculated against the whole sector: narrowing the comparison group changes who you compare with, not the scores. Missing metrics are left out and the remaining weights rescaled. How we score