Medical - Devices
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
AVNS vs NTRA vs EXAS vs MMSI
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Instruments & Supplies
AVNS vs NTRA vs EXAS vs MMSI — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Devices | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Instruments & Supplies |
| Market Cap | $1.16B | $31.16B | $20.02B | $3.72B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $716M | $2.31B | $3.25B | $1.54B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-69M | $-208M | $-208M | $139M |
| Gross Margin | 49.4% | 64.8% | 69.7% | 48.7% |
| Operating Margin | -8.4% | -13.4% | -6.4% | 12.2% |
| Forward P/E | 24.8x | — | 582.8x | 15.5x |
| Total Debt | $129M | $214M | $2.52B | $898M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $90M | $1.08B | $956M | $449M |
AVNS vs NTRA vs EXAS vs MMSI — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Avanos Medical, Inc. (AVNS) | 100 | 85.2 | -14.8% |
| Natera, Inc. (NTRA) | 100 | 501.3 | +401.3% |
| Exact Sciences Corp… (EXAS) | 100 | 120.4 | +20.4% |
| Merit Medical Syste… (MMSI) | 100 | 138.5 | +38.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: AVNS vs NTRA vs EXAS vs MMSI
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
AVNS lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
NTRA is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 35.9%, EPS growth 0.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 41.1%
- 20.9% 10Y total return vs EXAS's 16.7%
- 35.9% revenue growth vs AVNS's 1.9%
EXAS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability is your priority.
- beta 0.12
- Beta 0.12 vs AVNS's 1.54
- +96.9% vs MMSI's -33.8%
MMSI carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.71, Low D/E 56.7%, current ratio 4.34x
- Beta 0.71, current ratio 4.34x
- Lower P/E (15.5x vs 582.8x)
- 9.0% margin vs AVNS's -9.7%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 35.9% revenue growth vs AVNS's 1.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (15.5x vs 582.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 9.0% margin vs AVNS's -9.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.12 vs AVNS's 1.54 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +96.9% vs MMSI's -33.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 5.2% ROA vs NTRA's -10.6%, ROIC 7.2% vs -36.1% |
AVNS vs NTRA vs EXAS vs MMSI — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
AVNS vs NTRA vs EXAS vs MMSI — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MMSI leads in 2 of 6 categories
NTRA leads 1 • EXAS leads 1 • AVNS leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MMSI leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
EXAS is the larger business by revenue, generating $3.2B annually — 4.5x AVNS's $716M. MMSI is the more profitable business, keeping 9.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to AVNS's -9.7%. On growth, NTRA holds the edge at +39.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $716M | $2.3B | $3.2B | $1.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$21M | -$310M | -$41M | $290M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$69M | -$208M | -$208M | $139M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $24M | $97M | $357M | $274M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +49.4% | +64.8% | +69.7% | +48.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -8.4% | -13.4% | -6.4% | +12.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -9.7% | -9.0% | -6.4% | +9.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +3.4% | +4.2% | +11.0% | +17.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +8.8% | +39.8% | +23.1% | +7.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -21.4% | +185.4% | +90.4% | +38.8% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — AVNS and MMSI each lead in 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.2B | $31.2B | $20.0B | $3.7B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.2B | $30.3B | $21.6B | $4.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -16.97x | -144.62x | -95.37x | 29.26x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 24.77x | — | 582.83x | 15.46x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | 13.06x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.65x | 13.51x | 6.16x | 2.45x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.48x | 17.55x | 8.24x | 2.38x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 26.91x | 285.53x | 56.10x | 17.24x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MMSI leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MMSI delivers a 8.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $9 in annual profit, vs $-15 for NTRA. NTRA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.13x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to EXAS's 1.05x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), EXAS scores 7/9 vs NTRA's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -8.9% | -15.3% | -8.7% | +8.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -6.6% | -10.6% | -3.5% | +5.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -5.4% | -36.1% | -3.6% | +7.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -6.5% | -18.3% | -4.0% | +7.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.17x | 0.13x | 1.05x | 0.57x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $39M | -$862M | $1.6B | $450M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $90M | $1.1B | $956M | $449M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $129M | $214M | $2.5B | $898M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -16.71x | -25.21x | -5.47x | 10.74x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NTRA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in NTRA five years ago would be worth $21,587 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,021 for AVNS. Over the past 12 months, EXAS leads with a +96.9% total return vs MMSI's -33.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NTRA at 60.6% vs MMSI's -9.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +121.6% | -3.9% | +3.1% | -27.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +96.9% | +37.3% | +96.9% | -33.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +5.6% | +314.0% | +53.0% | -26.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -39.8% | +115.9% | +0.4% | -3.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -17.0% | +2089.4% | +1669.1% | +214.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +1.8% | +60.6% | +15.2% | -9.8% |
Risk & Volatility
EXAS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
EXAS is the less volatile stock with a 0.12 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than AVNS's 1.54 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. EXAS currently trades 99.9% from its 52-week high vs MMSI's 62.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.54x | 1.26x | 0.12x | 0.71x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $24.80 | $256.36 | $104.98 | $100.19 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $9.30 | $131.81 | $38.81 | $59.74 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +99.9% | +85.7% | +99.9% | +62.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 90.8 | 57.1 | 76.4 | 34.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.3M | 1.3M | 4.2M | 769K |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: AVNS as "Hold", NTRA as "Buy", EXAS as "Buy", MMSI as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 52.4% upside for MMSI (target: $95) vs -7.1% for AVNS (target: $23).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $23.00 | $262.50 | $103.18 | $95.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 8 | 27 | 41 | 13 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.3% | 0.0% | +0.1% | 0.0% |
MMSI leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). NTRA leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
AVNS vs NTRA vs EXAS vs MMSI: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is AVNS or NTRA or EXAS or MMSI a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Natera, Inc.
(NTRA) is the stronger pick with 35. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 9% for Avanos Medical, Inc. (AVNS). Merit Medical Systems, Inc. (MMSI) offers the better valuation at 29. 3x trailing P/E (15. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Natera, Inc. (NTRA) a "Buy" — based on 27 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 has the better valuation — AVNS or NTRA or EXAS or MMSI?
On forward P/E, Merit Medical Systems, Inc.
is actually cheaper at 15. 5x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — AVNS or NTRA or EXAS or MMSI?
Over the past 5 years, Natera, Inc.
(NTRA) delivered a total return of +115. 9%, compared to -39. 8% for Avanos Medical, Inc. (AVNS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NTRA returned +20. 9% versus AVNS's -17. 0%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — AVNS or NTRA or EXAS or MMSI?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Exact Sciences Corporation (EXAS) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
12β versus Avanos Medical, Inc. 's 1. 54β — meaning AVNS is approximately 1181% more volatile than EXAS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Natera, Inc. (NTRA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 13% versus 105% for Exact Sciences Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — AVNS or NTRA or EXAS or MMSI?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Natera, Inc.
(NTRA) is pulling ahead at 35. 9% versus 1. 9% for Avanos Medical, Inc. (AVNS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Avanos Medical, Inc. grew EPS 82. 9% year-over-year, compared to 0. 7% for Natera, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, NTRA leads at 41. 1% 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.
06Which has better profit margins — AVNS or NTRA or EXAS or MMSI?
Merit Medical Systems, Inc.
(MMSI) is the more profitable company, earning 8. 5% net margin versus -9. 7% for Avanos Medical, Inc. — meaning it keeps 8. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MMSI leads at 12. 2% versus -13. 4% for NTRA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — EXAS leads at 69. 7%, 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.
07Is AVNS or NTRA or EXAS or MMSI more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Merit Medical Systems, Inc.
(MMSI) trades at 15. 5x forward P/E versus 582. 8x for Exact Sciences Corporation — 567. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MMSI: 52. 4% to $95. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — AVNS or NTRA or EXAS or MMSI?
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.
09Is AVNS or NTRA or EXAS or MMSI better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Exact Sciences Corporation (EXAS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
12), +1669% 10Y return). Avanos Medical, Inc. (AVNS) carries a higher beta of 1. 54 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (EXAS: +1669%, AVNS: -17. 0%), 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.
10What are the main differences between AVNS and NTRA and EXAS and MMSI?
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: AVNS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NTRA is a mid-cap high-growth stock; EXAS is a mid-cap high-growth stock; MMSI is a small-cap quality compounder 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.