FTV vs DHR

For growth investors, Danaher Corporation (DHR) is the stronger pick with 2.

9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -17. 5% for Fortive Corporation (FTV). Danaher Corporation (DHR) offers the better valuation at 34. 7x trailing P/E (20. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Danaher Corporation (DHR) a "Buy" — based on 42 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.

On trailing P/E, Danaher Corporation (DHR) is the cheapest at 34.

7x versus Fortive Corporation at 34. 7x. On forward P/E, Fortive Corporation is actually cheaper at 20. 4x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Fortive Corporation (FTV) delivered a total return of +12.

7%, compared to -20. 9% for Danaher Corporation (DHR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: DHR returned +218. 0% versus FTV's +103. 5%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Fortive Corporation (FTV) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

83β versus Danaher Corporation's 0. 94β — meaning DHR is approximately 13% more volatile than FTV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Danaher Corporation (DHR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 35% versus 50% for Fortive Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Danaher Corporation (DHR) is pulling ahead at 2.

9% versus -17. 5% for Fortive Corporation (FTV). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Danaher Corporation grew EPS -4. 7% year-over-year, compared to -26. 3% for Fortive Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, DHR leads at -2. 7% 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.

Danaher Corporation (DHR) is the more profitable company, earning 14.

7% net margin versus 11. 3% for Fortive Corporation — meaning it keeps 14. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: DHR leads at 20. 9% versus 17. 7% for FTV. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FTV leads at 61. 0%, 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.

On forward earnings alone, Fortive Corporation (FTV) trades at 20.

4x forward P/E versus 20. 7x for Danaher Corporation — 0. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for DHR: 41. 2% to $247. 00.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Danaher Corporation (DHR) offers the highest yield at 0. 7%, versus 0. 5% for Fortive Corporation (FTV).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Danaher Corporation (DHR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

94), 0. 7% yield, +218. 0% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (DHR: +218. 0%, FTV: +103. 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.

These companies operate in different sectors (FTV (Technology) and DHR (Healthcare)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

DHR pays a dividend while FTV does not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. 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.