BEAM vs NTLA: How Beam Therapeutics and Intellia Therapeutics Compare (2026)

Same yardstick, side by side (as of July 2026). Valuation lined up like this is most meaningful for two names in the same corner of the market, which these are. Figures are approximate; verify before investing.

The metrics above tell you which is the marginally better business. The bigger risk for most people is not picking the slightly worse stock, it is over-concentrating. BEAM and NTLA share themes, so owning both, or adding either to what you already hold, can quietly push a large share of your portfolio into one bet.

This is the part a generic comparison page cannot answer, because it depends on what you own. Connect your brokerage and Walnut shows your real, combined BEAM and NTLA exposure, flags overlap with your existing positions, and tells you if adding one would tip you past a concentration you are comfortable with, read-only by default, with your login staying at your broker. Walnut is not an investment adviser.

Beam Therapeutics (NASDAQ: BEAM) develops precision genetic medicines using base editing, a technique it helped invent that rewrites a single letter of DNA without cutting both strands of the double helix, aiming for more precise fixes than first-generation CRISPR. Its pipeline spans risto-cel (formerly BEAM-101) for sickle cell disease, with a biologics license application targeted as early as year-end 2026, plus BEAM-302 for alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency, and BEAM-301 and BEAM-304 for rare liver-mediated genetic diseases. The company also runs collaborations with partners including Pfizer and Eli Lilly, which supply most of its reported revenue through upfront payments and milestones.

Full BEAM guide

Intellia Therapeutics, Inc. is a clinical-stage biotechnology company headquartered in Cambridge, Massachusetts, developing genome-editing therapies based on CRISPR/Cas9. Its core differentiator is a proprietary in vivo platform that delivers the editing machinery directly into the body, typically the liver, using lipid nanoparticles, so that a single dose can permanently inactivate or modify a disease-causing gene without removing cells from the patient. This contrasts with ex vivo approaches that edit cells outside the body and reinfuse them. The company is pre-revenue from products and currently records only collaboration revenue from partners; it funds operations through its cash reserves and periodic capital raises.

Full NTLA guide

Both fit overlapping themes, but they are not interchangeable. The useful comparison is which set of drivers and risks you want exposure to.

• BEAM drivers: Risto-cel sickle cell path to filing; In vivo liver franchise.
• NTLA drivers: Positive Late-Stage Lonvo-z Data in Hereditary Angioedema; In Vivo CRISPR Platform.

A faster-growing, richer-valued name usually swings harder, so it suits a longer horizon and a higher tolerance for volatility; a steadier, more cash-generative business suits a more conservative or income-minded investor. The honest test is which set of risks you could hold through a drawdown: Beam is pre-commercial and deeply unprofitable, so it carries the full binary risk of a clinical-stage biotech: a single failed trial, safety signal, or regulatory setback can reset the stock. For NTLA, intellia is pre-revenue from products, deeply unprofitable, and its value depends on binary clinical and regulatory outcomes; a single failed trial, safety signal, or FDA setback for lonvo-z or nex-z could sharply reduce the stock's value.

Growth-minded investors who believe the theme has years to run tend to accept the richer multiple for more upside; value-minded investors lean toward the cheaper forward earnings and steadier profile. Pick BEAM if you believe its drivers more; NTLA if you believe its. Many investors hold both, but since they share themes, that is a concentrated bet, not diversification. Decide deliberately and check overlap. For the full detail, see the BEAM and NTLA guides.

BEAM. Beam's revenue is collaboration and milestone income, not product sales, so it is lumpy and not comparable to a profitable company's top line. With no approved therapy and heavy R&D spending, the company runs large net losses funded by its cash pile. Valuation therefore reflects the market's probability-weighted view of the pipeline rather than current earnings.

NTLA. Because Intellia has no product profits and only collaboration revenue, traditional earnings-based valuation multiples like P/E are negative and not analytically useful. The stock is better evaluated on its cash runway relative to its burn rate, the probability and timing of regulatory approval for lonvo-z and nex-z, and the risk-adjusted commercial potential of those programs. The April 2026 equity raise extended the stated runway at least into 2028, but pre-profit biotechs of this type typically require additional capital before reaching sustained profitability, so dilution and the binary nature of trial readouts are central to any valuation view.

Headline figures (approximate, MAY 2026): BEAM shows market cap ~$3.6B, revenue (q1 2026) ~$31.7M, revenue (q1 2025) ~$7.5M, net loss (q1 2026) ~$94.3M; NTLA shows cash and marketable securities ~$517 million (as of March 31, 2026), plus ~$207 million gross from an April 2026 equity offering, stated cash runway Expected to fund operations at least into 2028, net loss (q1 2026) ~$96 million (versus ~$114 million in Q1 2025), revenue Collaboration revenue only (e.g., Regeneron); no product revenue yet.

BEAM and NTLA are related but distinct: same themes, different businesses and risks. Neither wins in the abstract; the right pick is whichever thesis you actually believe, sized so you are not over-concentrated in one theme. Walnut can show your combined BEAM and NTLA exposure against your real portfolio. It is not an investment adviser.