Medical - Devices
Compare Stocks
3 / 10Stock Comparison
CERS vs TXG vs BLFS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Healthcare Information Services
Medical - Instruments & Supplies
CERS vs TXG vs BLFS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Devices | Medical - Healthcare Information Services | Medical - Instruments & Supplies |
| Market Cap | $523M | $2.89B | $1.13B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $217M | $643M | $100M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-10M | $-44M | $-10M |
| Gross Margin | 53.0% | 69.1% | 64.0% |
| Operating Margin | -8.2% | -9.5% | -10.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 156.4x |
| Total Debt | $97M | $158M | $18M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $20M | $474M | $33M |
CERS vs TXG vs BLFS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cerus Corporation (CERS) | 100 | 42.0 | -58.0% |
| 10x Genomics, Inc. (TXG) | 100 | 28.8 | -71.2% |
| BioLife Solutions, … (BLFS) | 100 | 140.5 | +40.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CERS vs TXG vs BLFS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CERS is the clearest fit if your priority is quality.
- -4.4% margin vs BLFS's -10.5%
TXG is the clearest fit if your priority is value and momentum.
- Better valuation composite
- +169.8% vs BLFS's +8.3%
BLFS has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 1.67
- Rev growth 17.0%, EPS growth 43.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 8.1%
- 12.2% 10Y total return vs CERS's -54.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 17.0% revenue growth vs TXG's 5.2% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | -4.4% margin vs BLFS's -10.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.67 vs TXG's 2.32, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 3 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +169.8% vs BLFS's +8.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -2.6% ROA vs TXG's -4.4%, ROIC -2.8% vs -17.9% |
CERS vs TXG vs BLFS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CERS vs TXG vs BLFS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CERS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TXG is the larger business by revenue, generating $643M annually — 6.4x BLFS's $100M. CERS is the more profitable business, keeping -4.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BLFS's -10.5%. On growth, CERS holds the edge at +24.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $217M | $643M | $100M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$16M | -$29M | -$7M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$10M | -$44M | -$10M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$1M | $130M | $11M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +53.0% | +69.1% | +64.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -8.2% | -9.5% | -10.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -4.4% | -6.8% | -10.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -0.6% | +20.2% | +10.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +24.1% | +0.6% | +14.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +75.7% | +67.5% | — |
Valuation Metrics
BLFS leads this category, winning 2 of 4 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $523M | $2.9B | $1.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $600M | $2.6B | $1.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -31.83x | -64.06x | -92.48x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 156.43x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.54x | 4.50x | 11.74x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 7.66x | 3.51x | 3.02x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 61.37x | 22.23x | 106.19x |
Profitability & Efficiency
BLFS leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
BLFS delivers a -2.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-3 in annual profit, vs $-15 for CERS. BLFS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.05x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CERS's 1.49x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BLFS scores 6/9 vs TXG's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -15.2% | -5.7% | -2.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -4.4% | -4.4% | -2.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -19.7% | -17.9% | -2.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -28.1% | -13.1% | -3.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.49x | 0.20x | 0.05x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $77M | -$316M | -$15M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $20M | $474M | $33M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $97M | $158M | $18M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -2.63x | -7374.83x | -18.62x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
BLFS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in BLFS five years ago would be worth $7,300 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,532 for TXG. Over the past 12 months, TXG leads with a +169.8% total return vs BLFS's +8.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors BLFS at 6.5% vs TXG's -25.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +32.5% | +34.9% | -3.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +100.8% | +169.8% | +8.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +18.1% | -58.8% | +20.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -57.5% | -84.7% | -27.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -54.5% | -57.5% | +1221.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +5.7% | -25.6% | +6.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — TXG and BLFS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
BLFS is the less volatile stock with a 1.67 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than TXG's 2.32 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. TXG currently trades 84.8% from its 52-week high vs BLFS's 78.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.13x | 2.32x | 1.67x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $3.15 | $26.45 | $29.62 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.15 | $7.72 | $17.86 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +82.9% | +84.8% | +78.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 70.6 | 53.0 | 56.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.2M | 2.3M | 422K |
Analyst Outlook
BLFS leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CERS as "Buy", TXG as "Hold", BLFS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 53.3% upside for CERS (target: $4) vs -1.2% for TXG (target: $22).
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $4.00 | $22.14 | $33.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 10 | 22 | 17 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
BLFS leads in 4 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). CERS leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 1 tied.
CERS vs TXG vs BLFS: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CERS or TXG or BLFS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, BioLife Solutions, Inc.
(BLFS) is the stronger pick with 17. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 2% for 10x Genomics, Inc. (TXG). Analysts rate Cerus Corporation (CERS) a "Buy" — based on 10 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which is the better long-term investment — CERS or TXG or BLFS?
Over the past 5 years, BioLife Solutions, Inc.
(BLFS) delivered a total return of -27. 0%, compared to -84. 7% for 10x Genomics, Inc. (TXG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: BLFS returned +1221% versus TXG's -57. 5%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — CERS or TXG or BLFS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), BioLife Solutions, Inc.
(BLFS) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 67β versus 10x Genomics, Inc. 's 2. 32β — meaning TXG is approximately 39% more volatile than BLFS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, BioLife Solutions, Inc. (BLFS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 5% versus 149% for Cerus Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — CERS or TXG or BLFS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), BioLife Solutions, Inc.
(BLFS) is pulling ahead at 17. 0% versus 5. 2% for 10x Genomics, Inc. (TXG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: 10x Genomics, Inc. grew EPS 77. 0% year-over-year, compared to 25. 5% for Cerus Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, CERS leads at 8. 4% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
05Which has better profit margins — CERS or TXG or BLFS?
10x Genomics, Inc.
(TXG) is the more profitable company, earning -6. 8% net margin versus -12. 6% for BioLife Solutions, Inc. — meaning it keeps -6. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: BLFS leads at -12. 6% versus -17. 6% for CERS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — TXG leads at 69. 1%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
06Is CERS or TXG or BLFS more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CERS: 53.
3% to $4. 00.
07Which pays a better dividend — CERS or TXG or BLFS?
None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.
All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.
08Is CERS or TXG or BLFS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, BioLife Solutions, Inc.
(BLFS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+1221% 10Y return). 10x Genomics, Inc. (TXG) carries a higher beta of 2. 32 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (BLFS: +1221%, TXG: -57. 5%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
09What are the main differences between CERS and TXG and BLFS?
Both stocks operate in the Healthcare sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: CERS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; TXG is a small-cap quality compounder stock; BLFS is a small-cap high-growth stock. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.