Medical - Instruments & Supplies
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
AZTA vs FROG vs HUBS vs GTLB vs MSFT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Software - Application
Software - Application
Software - Application
Software - Infrastructure
AZTA vs FROG vs HUBS vs GTLB vs MSFT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Instruments & Supplies | Software - Application | Software - Application | Software - Application | Software - Infrastructure |
| Market Cap | $855M | $6.91B | $12.58B | $4.30B | $3.13T |
| Revenue (TTM) | $597M | $563M | $3.30B | $957M | $318.27B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-178M | $-62M | $100M | $-56M | $125.22B |
| Gross Margin | 44.6% | 77.4% | 83.7% | 87.5% | 68.3% |
| Operating Margin | -26.4% | -14.9% | 1.9% | -12.2% | 46.8% |
| Forward P/E | 23.7x | 63.4x | 19.6x | 32.2x | 25.3x |
| Total Debt | $111M | $19M | $485M | $0.00 | $112.18B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $280M | $77M | $882M | $230M | $30.24B |
AZTA vs FROG vs HUBS vs GTLB vs MSFT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Oct 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Azenta, Inc. (AZTA) | 100 | 15.9 | -84.1% |
| JFrog Ltd. (FROG) | 100 | 174.4 | +74.4% |
| HubSpot, Inc. (HUBS) | 100 | 30.2 | -69.8% |
| GitLab Inc. (GTLB) | 100 | 23.1 | -76.9% |
| Microsoft Corporati… (MSFT) | 100 | 126.9 | +26.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: AZTA vs FROG vs HUBS vs GTLB vs MSFT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, AZTA doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
FROG is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if momentum is your priority.
- +65.0% vs HUBS's -62.0%
HUBS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.18, Low D/E 23.5%, current ratio 1.52x
- Lower P/E (19.6x vs 25.3x)
GTLB is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and defensive.
- Rev growth 26.0%, EPS growth -7.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 31.1%
- Beta 1.21, current ratio 2.54x
- 26.0% revenue growth vs AZTA's 3.6%
MSFT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 19 yrs, beta 0.89, yield 0.8%
- 7.9% 10Y total return vs HUBS's 469.1%
- 39.3% margin vs AZTA's -29.9%
- Beta 0.89 vs AZTA's 2.17
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 26.0% revenue growth vs AZTA's 3.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (19.6x vs 25.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 39.3% margin vs AZTA's -29.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.89 vs AZTA's 2.17 | |
| Dividends | 0.8% yield; 19-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +65.0% vs HUBS's -62.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 19.2% ROA vs AZTA's -8.8%, ROIC 24.9% vs -0.5% |
AZTA vs FROG vs HUBS vs GTLB vs MSFT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
AZTA vs FROG vs HUBS vs GTLB vs MSFT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MSFT leads in 2 of 6 categories
AZTA leads 1 • FROG leads 1 • HUBS leads 0 • GTLB leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — FROG and MSFT each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MSFT is the larger business by revenue, generating $318.3B annually — 564.9x FROG's $563M. MSFT is the more profitable business, keeping 39.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to AZTA's -29.9%. On growth, FROG holds the edge at +25.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $597M | $563M | $3.3B | $957M | $318.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$115M | -$66M | $166M | -$104M | $192.6B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$178M | -$62M | $100M | -$56M | $125.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $29M | $151M | $712M | $222M | $72.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +44.6% | +77.4% | +83.7% | +87.5% | +68.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -26.4% | -14.9% | +1.9% | -12.2% | +46.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -29.9% | -10.9% | +3.0% | -5.8% | +39.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +4.8% | +26.9% | +21.6% | +23.2% | +22.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +1.0% | +25.8% | +23.4% | +23.9% | +18.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -3.0% | +56.3% | +2.5% | -133.3% | +23.4% |
Valuation Metrics
AZTA leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 30.9x trailing earnings, MSFT trades at a 89% valuation discount to HUBS's 284.1x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, AZTA's 13.8x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than HUBS's 69.2x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $855M | $6.9B | $12.6B | $4.3B | $3.13T |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $687M | $6.9B | $12.2B | $4.1B | $3.21T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -15.22x | -91.97x | 284.08x | -74.06x | 30.86x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 23.68x | 63.45x | 19.61x | 32.24x | 25.34x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | 1.64x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 13.75x | — | 69.24x | — | 19.72x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.44x | 12.99x | 4.02x | 4.49x | 11.10x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.49x | 7.47x | 6.29x | 4.15x | 9.15x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 22.32x | 48.56x | 17.77x | 19.36x | 43.66x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MSFT leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MSFT delivers a 33.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $33 in annual profit, vs $-11 for AZTA. FROG carries lower financial leverage with a 0.02x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MSFT's 0.33x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), AZTA scores 6/9 vs GTLB's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -10.7% | -7.0% | +5.0% | -5.9% | +33.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -8.8% | -4.7% | +2.7% | -3.6% | +19.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -0.5% | -8.0% | +0.4% | -12.5% | +24.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -0.6% | -9.6% | +0.5% | -12.1% | +29.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.06x | 0.02x | 0.23x | — | 0.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$169M | -$57M | -$397M | -$230M | $81.9B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $280M | $77M | $882M | $230M | $30.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $111M | $19M | $485M | $0 | $112.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | — | 4753.07x | — | 55.65x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
FROG leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MSFT five years ago would be worth $17,246 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,903 for AZTA. Over the past 12 months, FROG leads with a +65.0% total return vs HUBS's -62.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors FROG at 38.5% vs AZTA's -25.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -44.4% | -4.3% | -36.1% | -28.4% | -10.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -26.5% | +65.0% | -62.0% | -44.9% | -2.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -59.1% | +165.6% | -45.1% | -14.2% | +39.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -81.0% | +58.8% | -52.1% | -75.1% | +72.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +123.4% | -12.0% | +469.1% | -75.1% | +787.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -25.8% | +38.5% | -18.1% | -5.0% | +11.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — FROG and MSFT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MSFT is the less volatile stock with a 0.89 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than AZTA's 2.17 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FROG currently trades 81.0% from its 52-week high vs HUBS's 35.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.17x | 1.24x | 1.18x | 1.21x | 0.89x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $41.73 | $70.43 | $682.57 | $54.08 | $555.45 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $17.11 | $33.74 | $187.45 | $18.74 | $356.28 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +44.5% | +81.0% | +35.8% | +47.9% | +75.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 31.1 | 67.3 | 51.1 | 59.3 | 54.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.0M | 2.7M | 1.5M | 6.4M | 32.5M |
Analyst Outlook
MSFT leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: AZTA as "Buy", FROG as "Buy", HUBS as "Buy", GTLB as "Buy", MSFT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 140.5% upside for AZTA (target: $45) vs 20.5% for FROG (target: $69). MSFT is the only dividend payer here at 0.77% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $44.67 | $68.71 | $360.89 | $36.13 | $551.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 12 | 22 | 47 | 30 | 81 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | +0.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | — | — | — | 19 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | $3.23 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +4.0% | +0.3% | +0.6% |
MSFT leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Analyst Outlook). AZTA leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
AZTA vs FROG vs HUBS vs GTLB vs MSFT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is AZTA or FROG or HUBS or GTLB or MSFT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, GitLab Inc.
(GTLB) is the stronger pick with 26. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 6% for Azenta, Inc. (AZTA). Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) offers the better valuation at 30. 9x trailing P/E (25. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Azenta, Inc. (AZTA) a "Buy" — based on 12 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 — AZTA or FROG or HUBS or GTLB or MSFT?
On trailing P/E, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the cheapest at 30.
9x versus HubSpot, Inc. at 284. 1x. On forward P/E, HubSpot, Inc. is actually cheaper at 19. 6x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — AZTA or FROG or HUBS or GTLB or MSFT?
Over the past 5 years, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) delivered a total return of +72.
5%, compared to -81. 0% for Azenta, Inc. (AZTA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MSFT returned +787. 7% versus GTLB's -75. 1%. 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 — AZTA or FROG or HUBS or GTLB or MSFT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
89β versus Azenta, Inc. 's 2. 17β — meaning AZTA is approximately 145% more volatile than MSFT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, JFrog Ltd. (FROG) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 33% for Microsoft Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — AZTA or FROG or HUBS or GTLB or MSFT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), GitLab Inc.
(GTLB) is pulling ahead at 26. 0% versus 3. 6% for Azenta, Inc. (AZTA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: HubSpot, Inc. grew EPS 863. 0% year-over-year, compared to -775. 0% for GitLab Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, GTLB leads at 31. 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 — AZTA or FROG or HUBS or GTLB or MSFT?
Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the more profitable company, earning 36.
1% net margin versus -13. 5% for JFrog Ltd. — meaning it keeps 36. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MSFT leads at 45. 6% versus -15. 7% for FROG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — GTLB leads at 87. 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.
07Is AZTA or FROG or HUBS or GTLB or MSFT more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, HubSpot, Inc.
(HUBS) trades at 19. 6x forward P/E versus 63. 4x for JFrog Ltd. — 43. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for AZTA: 140. 5% to $44. 67.
08Which pays a better dividend — AZTA or FROG or HUBS or GTLB or MSFT?
In this comparison, MSFT (0.
8% yield) pays a dividend. AZTA, FROG, HUBS, GTLB do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is AZTA or FROG or HUBS or GTLB or MSFT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
89), 0. 8% yield, +787. 7% 10Y return). Azenta, Inc. (AZTA) carries a higher beta of 2. 17 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (MSFT: +787. 7%, AZTA: +123. 4%), 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 AZTA and FROG and HUBS and GTLB and MSFT?
These companies operate in different sectors (AZTA (Healthcare) and FROG (Technology) and HUBS (Technology) and GTLB (Technology) and MSFT (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: AZTA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; FROG is a small-cap high-growth stock; HUBS is a mid-cap high-growth stock; GTLB is a small-cap high-growth stock; MSFT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock. MSFT pays a dividend while AZTA, FROG, HUBS, GTLB do 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 all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.