Medical - Instruments & Supplies
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
BAX vs DBVT vs MRK vs BDX vs PFE
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - General
Medical - Instruments & Supplies
Drug Manufacturers - General
BAX vs DBVT vs MRK vs BDX vs PFE — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Instruments & Supplies | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - General | Medical - Instruments & Supplies | Drug Manufacturers - General |
| Market Cap | $9.04B | $1712.35T | $277.34B | $55.53B | $150.63B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $11.32B | $0.00 | $64.93B | $21.36B | $63.31B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-1.10B | $-168M | $18.25B | $1.14B | $7.49B |
| Gross Margin | 30.1% | — | 74.2% | 46.5% | 69.3% |
| Operating Margin | -2.7% | — | 41.1% | 10.6% | 23.4% |
| Forward P/E | 9.2x | — | 21.9x | 12.3x | 8.9x |
| Total Debt | $10.00B | $22M | $50.53B | $19.18B | $67.42B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1.97B | $194M | $14.56B | $851M | $1.14B |
BAX vs DBVT vs MRK vs BDX vs PFE — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Baxter Internationa… (BAX) | 100 | 19.5 | -80.5% |
| DBV Technologies S.… (DBVT) | 100 | 41.2 | -58.8% |
| Merck & Co., Inc. (MRK) | 100 | 145.9 | +45.9% |
| Becton, Dickinson a… (BDX) | 100 | 103.0 | +3.0% |
| Pfizer Inc. (PFE) | 100 | 73.1 | -26.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: BAX vs DBVT vs MRK vs BDX vs PFE
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, BAX doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
DBVT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +110.4% vs BAX's -41.8%
MRK carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 166.5% 10Y total return vs BDX's 80.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.48, Low D/E 96.0%, current ratio 1.54x
- 28.1% margin vs BAX's -9.7%
- Beta 0.48 vs BAX's 1.37, lower leverage
BDX is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and valuation efficiency.
- Rev growth 8.2%, EPS growth -0.5%, 3Y rev CAGR 5.0%
- PEG 0.74 vs MRK's 1.03
- 8.2% revenue growth vs DBVT's -100.0%
PFE is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and defensive is your priority.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.54, yield 6.5%
- Beta 0.54, yield 6.5%, current ratio 1.16x
- Lower P/E (8.9x vs 21.9x)
- 6.5% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs MRK's 2.9%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 8.2% revenue growth vs DBVT's -100.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.9x vs 21.9x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 28.1% margin vs BAX's -9.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.48 vs BAX's 1.37, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 6.5% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs MRK's 2.9%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +110.4% vs BAX's -41.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 14.6% ROA vs DBVT's -89.0% |
BAX vs DBVT vs MRK vs BDX vs PFE — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
BAX vs DBVT vs MRK vs BDX vs PFE — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MRK leads in 2 of 6 categories
PFE leads 2 • DBVT leads 1 • BAX leads 0 • BDX leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MRK leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MRK and DBVT operate at a comparable scale, with $64.9B and $0 in trailing revenue. MRK is the more profitable business, keeping 28.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BAX's -9.7%. On growth, PFE holds the edge at +5.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $11.3B | $0 | $64.9B | $21.4B | $63.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $671M | -$112M | $32.4B | $4.2B | $21.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$1.1B | -$168M | $18.3B | $1.1B | $7.5B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $501M | -$151M | $12.4B | $3.1B | $9.5B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +30.1% | — | +74.2% | +46.5% | +69.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -2.7% | — | +41.1% | +10.6% | +23.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -9.7% | — | +28.1% | +5.3% | +11.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +4.4% | — | +19.0% | +14.7% | +15.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +2.9% | — | +4.5% | -10.6% | +5.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -112.0% | +91.5% | -19.6% | -2.0% | -9.5% |
Valuation Metrics
PFE leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.4x trailing earnings, MRK trades at a 41% valuation discount to BDX's 26.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), MRK offers better value at 0.73x vs BDX's 1.59x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $9.0B | $1712.35T | $277.3B | $55.5B | $150.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $17.1B | $1712.35T | $313.3B | $73.9B | $216.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -10.01x | -0.76x | 15.42x | 26.29x | 19.47x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 9.17x | — | 21.93x | 12.27x | 8.94x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.73x | 1.59x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 25.37x | — | 10.68x | 14.65x | 10.66x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.80x | — | 4.27x | 2.54x | 2.41x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.47x | 0.66x | 5.35x | 1.73x | 1.74x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 27.99x | — | 22.44x | 20.80x | 16.60x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MRK leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MRK delivers a 36.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $36 in annual profit, vs $-130 for DBVT. DBVT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.13x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to BAX's 1.64x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BDX scores 7/9 vs MRK's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -16.5% | -130.2% | +36.1% | +4.5% | +8.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -5.4% | -89.0% | +14.6% | +2.1% | +3.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -1.4% | — | +22.0% | +4.3% | +7.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -1.7% | -145.7% | +23.8% | +5.4% | +9.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 7 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.64x | 0.13x | 0.96x | 0.76x | 0.78x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $8.0B | -$172M | $36.0B | $18.3B | $66.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $2.0B | $194M | $14.6B | $851M | $1.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $10.0B | $22M | $50.5B | $19.2B | $67.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -0.83x | -189.82x | 19.68x | 4.09x | 4.02x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
DBVT leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MRK five years ago would be worth $17,024 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,566 for BAX. Over the past 12 months, DBVT leads with a +110.4% total return vs BAX's -41.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors DBVT at 6.2% vs BAX's -24.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -10.2% | +4.9% | +6.3% | +0.7% | +6.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -41.8% | +110.4% | +46.1% | +51.8% | +23.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -56.3% | +19.7% | +2.9% | +5.0% | -18.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -74.3% | -69.1% | +70.2% | +16.9% | -13.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -42.4% | -87.0% | +166.5% | +80.2% | +29.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -24.1% | +6.2% | +0.9% | +1.6% | -6.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MRK and PFE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MRK is the less volatile stock with a 0.48 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BAX's 1.37 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. PFE currently trades 92.1% from its 52-week high vs BAX's 53.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.37x | 1.26x | 0.48x | 0.66x | 0.54x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $32.68 | $26.18 | $125.14 | $205.52 | $28.75 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $15.73 | $7.53 | $73.31 | $100.31 | $21.97 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +53.6% | +76.3% | +89.7% | +74.6% | +92.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 44.0 | 48.1 | 46.7 | 32.2 | 44.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 8.7M | 252K | 7.3M | 2.5M | 33.3M |
Analyst Outlook
PFE leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: BAX as "Hold", DBVT as "Buy", MRK as "Buy", BDX as "Buy", PFE as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 131.8% upside for DBVT (target: $46) vs 3.0% for PFE (target: $27). For income investors, PFE offers the higher dividend yield at 6.49% vs BDX's 2.72%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $19.75 | $46.33 | $129.31 | $172.85 | $27.27 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 36 | 15 | 37 | 33 | 39 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.9% | — | +2.9% | +2.7% | +6.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 0 | 14 | 1 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.68 | — | $3.26 | $4.17 | $1.72 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +1.8% | +1.8% | 0.0% |
MRK leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). PFE leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
BAX vs DBVT vs MRK vs BDX vs PFE: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is BAX or DBVT or MRK or BDX or PFE a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Becton, Dickinson and Company (BDX) is the stronger pick with 8.
2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -1. 6% for Pfizer Inc. (PFE). Merck & Co. , Inc. (MRK) offers the better valuation at 15. 4x trailing P/E (21. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate DBV Technologies S. A. (DBVT) a "Buy" — based on 15 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 — BAX or DBVT or MRK or BDX or PFE?
On trailing P/E, Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the cheapest at 15. 4x versus Becton, Dickinson and Company at 26. 3x. On forward P/E, Pfizer Inc. is actually cheaper at 8. 9x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Becton, Dickinson and Company wins at 0. 74x versus Merck & Co. , Inc. 's 1. 03x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — BAX or DBVT or MRK or BDX or PFE?
Over the past 5 years, Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) delivered a total return of +70. 2%, compared to -74. 3% for Baxter International Inc. (BAX). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MRK returned +166. 5% versus DBVT's -87. 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 — BAX or DBVT or MRK or BDX or PFE?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 48β versus Baxter International Inc. 's 1. 37β — meaning BAX is approximately 188% more volatile than MRK relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, DBV Technologies S. A. (DBVT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 13% versus 164% for Baxter International Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — BAX or DBVT or MRK or BDX or PFE?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Becton, Dickinson and Company (BDX) is pulling ahead at 8.
2% versus -1. 6% for Pfizer Inc. (PFE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Merck & Co. , Inc. grew EPS 8. 0% year-over-year, compared to -347. 5% for DBV Technologies S. A.. Over a 3-year CAGR, BDX leads at 5. 0% 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 — BAX or DBVT or MRK or BDX or PFE?
Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the more profitable company, earning 28. 1% net margin versus -8. 5% for Baxter International Inc. — meaning it keeps 28. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MRK leads at 36. 2% versus -2. 7% for BAX. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MRK leads at 72. 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.
07Is BAX or DBVT or MRK or BDX or PFE more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, Becton, Dickinson and Company (BDX) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 74x versus Merck & Co. , Inc. 's 1. 03x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Pfizer Inc. (PFE) trades at 8. 9x forward P/E versus 21. 9x for Merck & Co. , Inc. — 13. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for DBVT: 131. 8% to $46. 33.
08Which pays a better dividend — BAX or DBVT or MRK or BDX or PFE?
In this comparison, PFE (6.
5% yield), BAX (3. 9% yield), MRK (2. 9% yield), BDX (2. 7% yield) pay a dividend. DBVT does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is BAX or DBVT or MRK or BDX or PFE better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 48), 2. 9% yield, +166. 5% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MRK: +166. 5%, DBVT: -87. 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 BAX and DBVT and MRK and BDX and PFE?
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: BAX is a small-cap income-oriented stock; DBVT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; MRK is a large-cap deep-value stock; BDX is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; PFE is a mid-cap income-oriented stock. BAX, MRK, BDX, PFE pay a dividend while DBVT 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 all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.