AIRS vs SKIN vs INMD vs SSKN vs ESTA

For growth investors, Establishment Labs Holdings Inc.

(ESTA) is the stronger pick with 27. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -10. 0% for The Beauty Health Company (SKIN). InMode Ltd. (INMD) offers the better valuation at 10. 1x trailing P/E (10. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate InMode Ltd. (INMD) a "Buy" — based on 11 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.

Over the past 5 years, Establishment Labs Holdings Inc.

(ESTA) delivered a total return of -0. 3%, compared to -99. 1% for STRATA Skin Sciences, Inc. (SSKN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ESTA returned +186. 8% versus SSKN's -99. 6%. 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), STRATA Skin Sciences, Inc.

(SSKN) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 24β versus AirSculpt Technologies, Inc. 's 3. 37β — meaning AIRS is approximately -1481% more volatile than SSKN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, InMode Ltd. (INMD) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 6% for The Beauty Health Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Establishment Labs Holdings Inc.

(ESTA) is pulling ahead at 27. 1% versus -10. 0% for The Beauty Health Company (SKIN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Beauty Health Company grew EPS 55. 6% year-over-year, compared to -77. 4% for AirSculpt Technologies, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, AIRS leads at 10. 6% 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.

InMode Ltd.

(INMD) is the more profitable company, earning 25. 3% net margin versus -30. 1% for STRATA Skin Sciences, Inc. — meaning it keeps 25. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: INMD leads at 23. 0% versus -27. 6% for SSKN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — INMD leads at 78. 5%, 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.

Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for AIRS: 70.

5% to $6. 00.

In this comparison, AIRS (0.

1% yield) pays a dividend. SKIN, INMD, SSKN, ESTA do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, STRATA Skin Sciences, Inc.

(SSKN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 24)). The Beauty Health Company (SKIN) carries a higher beta of 2. 00 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (SSKN: -99. 6%, SKIN: -91. 7%), 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 (AIRS (Healthcare) and SKIN (Consumer Defensive) and INMD (Healthcare) and SSKN (Healthcare) and ESTA (Healthcare)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: AIRS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; SKIN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; INMD is a small-cap deep-value stock; SSKN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ESTA 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.