KMTS
KESTRA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, LTD.
Medical - Instruments & Supplies
Market Cap$1.26B
5Y Perf.-13.6%
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Try these comparisons:
Stock Comparison
KMTS vs ABT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
ABT
Abbott Laboratories
Medical - Devices
Market Cap$151.30B
5Y Perf.-34.4%
KMTS vs ABT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | KMTS | ABT |
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Instruments & Supplies | Medical - Devices |
| Market Cap | $1.26B | $151.30B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $84M | $43.84B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-145M | $13.98B |
| Gross Margin | 48.8% | 54.0% |
| Operating Margin | -171.5% | 17.8% |
| Forward P/E | — | 15.9x |
| Total Debt | $44M | $15.28B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $238M | $7.62B |
KMTS vs ABT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
KMTS
ABT
| Stock | Mar 25 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| KESTRA MEDICAL TECH… (KMTS) | 100 | 86.4 | -13.6% |
| Abbott Laboratories (ABT) | 100 | 65.6 | -34.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: KMTS vs ABT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Bottom line: ABT leads in 4 of 6 categories, making it the strongest pick for profitability and margin quality and capital preservation and lower volatility. KESTRA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, LTD. is the stronger pick specifically for growth and revenue expansion and recent price momentum and sentiment. As sector peers, any of these can serve as alternatives in the same allocation.
KMTS
KESTRA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, LTD.
The Growth Play
KMTS is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 115.1%, EPS growth -151.5%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.87, Low D/E 21.6%, current ratio 6.72x
- 115.1% revenue growth vs ABT's 4.6%
Best for: growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night
ABT
Abbott Laboratories
The Income Pick
ABT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 11 yrs, beta 0.25, yield 2.5%
- 173.7% 10Y total return vs KMTS's -1.5%
- Beta 0.25, yield 2.5%, current ratio 1.67x
Best for: income & stability and long-term compounding
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | KMTS | 115.1% revenue growth vs ABT's 4.6% |
| Quality / Margins | ABT | 31.9% margin vs KMTS's -173.0% |
| Stability / Safety | ABT | Beta 0.25 vs KMTS's 1.87 |
| Dividends | ABT | 2.5% yield, 11-year raise streak, vs KMTS's 0.2% |
| Momentum (1Y) | KMTS | -1.5% vs ABT's -33.2% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | ABT | 16.6% ROA vs KMTS's -48.8%, ROIC 9.9% vs -6.6% |
KMTS vs ABT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
FY 2024
KMTS vs ABT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
BEST OVERALLABTLAGGINGKMTS
KMTSKESTRA MEDICAL TECHNO…
1leads
ABTAbbott Laboratories
4leads
6 Total Categories
CATEGORYLEADERvs KMTSMETRICS WON
Income & Cash FlowRevenue, margins, and cash flow strength
ABT5/6
Valuation MetricsMultiples, price ratios, and targets
ABT2/3
Profitability & EfficiencyROE, ROIC, leverage, and quality scores
ABT6/9
Total Returns1Y, 3Y, 5Y total returns with dividends
KMTS5/6
Risk & VolatilityBeta, volatility, and downside exposure
Tied
—
Analyst OutlookRatings, price targets, and dividends
ABT2/2
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ABT leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ABT is the larger business by revenue, generating $43.8B annually — 523.7x KMTS's $84M. ABT is the more profitable business, keeping 31.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to KMTS's -173.0%. On growth, KMTS holds the edge at +62.7% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | KMTSKESTRA MEDICAL TE… | ABTAbbott Laboratori… |
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $84M | $43.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$142M | $10.9B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$145M | $14.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$120M | $6.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +48.8% | +54.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -171.5% | +17.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -173.0% | +31.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -143.3% | +15.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +62.7% | +6.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -22.0% | 0.0% |
ABT leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
ABT leads this category, winning 2 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | KMTSKESTRA MEDICAL TE… | ABTAbbott Laboratori… |
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.3B | $151.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.1B | $159.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -4.19x | 11.39x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 15.87x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.38x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 15.83x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 20.99x | 3.61x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 5.19x | 3.18x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 23.82x |
ABT leads this category, winning 2 of 3 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ABT leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ABT delivers a 27.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $27 in annual profit, vs $-69 for KMTS. KMTS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.22x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to ABT's 0.32x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ABT scores 7/9 vs KMTS's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | KMTSKESTRA MEDICAL TE… | ABTAbbott Laboratori… |
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -68.8% | +27.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -48.8% | +16.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -6.6% | +9.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -78.6% | +10.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.22x | 0.32x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$193M | $7.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $238M | $7.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $44M | $15.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -13.93x | 19.22x |
ABT leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
KMTS leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in KMTS five years ago would be worth $9,853 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,209 for ABT. Over the past 12 months, KMTS leads with a -1.5% total return vs ABT's -33.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors KMTS at -0.5% vs ABT's -5.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | KMTSKESTRA MEDICAL TE… | ABTAbbott Laboratori… |
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -11.8% | -28.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -1.5% | -33.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -1.5% | -15.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -1.5% | -17.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -1.5% | +173.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -0.5% | -5.4% |
KMTS leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — KMTS and ABT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ABT is the less volatile stock with a 0.25 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than KMTS's 1.87 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. KMTS currently trades 71.7% from its 52-week high vs ABT's 62.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | KMTSKESTRA MEDICAL TE… | ABTAbbott Laboratori… |
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.87x | 0.25x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $30.00 | $139.06 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $13.25 | $86.15 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +71.7% | +62.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 48.1 | 22.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 357K | 10.5M |
Evenly matched — KMTS and ABT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
ABT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates KMTS as "Buy" and ABT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 47.9% upside for ABT (target: $129) vs 30.1% for KMTS (target: $28). For income investors, ABT offers the higher dividend yield at 2.52% vs KMTS's 0.16%.
| Metric | KMTSKESTRA MEDICAL TE… | ABTAbbott Laboratori… |
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $28.00 | $128.71 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 4 | 41 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.2% | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 5 | 11 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.03 | $2.19 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.9% |
ABT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Key Takeaway
ABT leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). KMTS leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
Best OverallAbbott Laboratories (ABT)Leads 4 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...
KMTS vs ABT: Frequently Asked Questions
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is KMTS or ABT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, KESTRA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, LTD.
(KMTS) is the stronger pick with 115. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 4. 6% for Abbott Laboratories (ABT). Abbott Laboratories (ABT) offers the better valuation at 11. 4x trailing P/E (15. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate KESTRA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, LTD. (KMTS) a "Buy" — based on 4 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 — KMTS or ABT?
Over the past 5 years, KESTRA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, LTD.
(KMTS) delivered a total return of -1. 5%, compared to -17. 9% for Abbott Laboratories (ABT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ABT returned +173. 7% versus KMTS's -1. 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 — KMTS or ABT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
25β versus KESTRA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, LTD. 's 1. 87β — meaning KMTS is approximately 654% more volatile than ABT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, KESTRA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, LTD. (KMTS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 22% versus 32% for Abbott Laboratories — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — KMTS or ABT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), KESTRA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, LTD.
(KMTS) is pulling ahead at 115. 1% versus 4. 6% for Abbott Laboratories (ABT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Abbott Laboratories grew EPS 133. 6% year-over-year, compared to -151. 5% for KESTRA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, LTD.. 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 — KMTS or ABT?
Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the more profitable company, earning 31.
9% net margin versus -190. 3% for KESTRA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, LTD. — meaning it keeps 31. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ABT leads at 16. 3% versus -177. 8% for KMTS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ABT leads at 50. 8%, 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 KMTS or ABT more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ABT: 47.
9% to $128. 71.
07Which pays a better dividend — KMTS or ABT?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Abbott Laboratories (ABT) offers the highest yield at 2. 5%, versus 0. 2% for KESTRA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, LTD. (KMTS).
08Is KMTS or ABT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
25), 2. 5% yield, +173. 7% 10Y return). KESTRA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, LTD. (KMTS) carries a higher beta of 1. 87 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ABT: +173. 7%, KMTS: -1. 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 KMTS and ABT?
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: KMTS is a small-cap high-growth stock; ABT is a mid-cap deep-value stock. ABT pays a dividend while KMTS 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform both.
Revenue Growth>
%
(KMTS: 62.7% · ABT: 6.9%)You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.