PTN Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Alnylam Pharmaceuticals has a net margin of -- compared to Palatin Technologies's net margin of -14.12%. Palatin Technologies's return on equity of -- beat Alnylam Pharmaceuticals's return on equity of --.

Palatin Technologies has a consensus price target of --, signalling upside risk potential of 3239.7%. On the other hand Alnylam Pharmaceuticals has an analysts' consensus of $315.57 which suggests that it could grow by 30.07%. Given that Palatin Technologies has higher upside potential than Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, analysts believe Palatin Technologies is more attractive than Alnylam Pharmaceuticals.

Palatin Technologies has a beta of 0.896, which suggesting that the stock is 10.45% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Alnylam Pharmaceuticals has a beta of 0.300, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 70.047%.

Palatin Technologies has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Alnylam Pharmaceuticals offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Palatin Technologies pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Alnylam Pharmaceuticals pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Palatin Technologies quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than Alnylam Pharmaceuticals quarterly revenues of $593.2M. Palatin Technologies's net income of -- is lower than Alnylam Pharmaceuticals's net income of -$83.8M. Notably, Palatin Technologies's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Alnylam Pharmaceuticals's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Palatin Technologies is -- versus 13.77x for Alnylam Pharmaceuticals. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Blueprint Medicines has a net margin of -- compared to Palatin Technologies's net margin of -34.13%. Palatin Technologies's return on equity of -- beat Blueprint Medicines's return on equity of -24.43%.

Palatin Technologies has a consensus price target of --, signalling upside risk potential of 3239.7%. On the other hand Blueprint Medicines has an analysts' consensus of $124.90 which suggests that it could grow by 45.08%. Given that Palatin Technologies has higher upside potential than Blueprint Medicines, analysts believe Palatin Technologies is more attractive than Blueprint Medicines.

Palatin Technologies has a beta of 0.896, which suggesting that the stock is 10.45% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Blueprint Medicines has a beta of 0.746, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 25.37%.

Palatin Technologies has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Blueprint Medicines offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Palatin Technologies pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Blueprint Medicines pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Palatin Technologies quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than Blueprint Medicines quarterly revenues of $146.4M. Palatin Technologies's net income of -- is lower than Blueprint Medicines's net income of -$50M. Notably, Palatin Technologies's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Blueprint Medicines's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Palatin Technologies is -- versus 10.73x for Blueprint Medicines. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Bruker has a net margin of -- compared to Palatin Technologies's net margin of 1.4%. Palatin Technologies's return on equity of -- beat Bruker's return on equity of 6.78%.

Palatin Technologies has a consensus price target of --, signalling upside risk potential of 3239.7%. On the other hand Bruker has an analysts' consensus of $60.13 which suggests that it could grow by 54.3%. Given that Palatin Technologies has higher upside potential than Bruker, analysts believe Palatin Technologies is more attractive than Bruker.

Palatin Technologies has a beta of 0.896, which suggesting that the stock is 10.45% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Bruker has a beta of 1.184, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 18.426%.

Palatin Technologies has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Bruker offers a yield of 0.51% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.05 per share. Palatin Technologies pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Bruker pays out 26.7% of its earnings as a dividend. Bruker's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Palatin Technologies quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than Bruker quarterly revenues of $979.6M. Palatin Technologies's net income of -- is lower than Bruker's net income of $13.7M. Notably, Palatin Technologies's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Bruker's PE ratio is 51.28x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Palatin Technologies is -- versus 1.73x for Bruker. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Third Harmonic Bio has a net margin of -- compared to Palatin Technologies's net margin of --. Palatin Technologies's return on equity of -- beat Third Harmonic Bio's return on equity of --.

Palatin Technologies has a consensus price target of --, signalling upside risk potential of 3239.7%. On the other hand Third Harmonic Bio has an analysts' consensus of $4.58 which suggests that it could fall by -10.96%. Given that Palatin Technologies has higher upside potential than Third Harmonic Bio, analysts believe Palatin Technologies is more attractive than Third Harmonic Bio.

Palatin Technologies has a beta of 0.896, which suggesting that the stock is 10.45% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Third Harmonic Bio has a beta of 0.000, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 100%.

Palatin Technologies has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Third Harmonic Bio offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Palatin Technologies pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Third Harmonic Bio pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Palatin Technologies quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than Third Harmonic Bio quarterly revenues of --. Palatin Technologies's net income of -- is lower than Third Harmonic Bio's net income of -$13.1M. Notably, Palatin Technologies's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Third Harmonic Bio's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Palatin Technologies is -- versus -- for Third Harmonic Bio. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.