Medical - Instruments & Supplies
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
BLFS vs RGEN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Instruments & Supplies
BLFS vs RGEN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Instruments & Supplies | Medical - Instruments & Supplies |
| Market Cap | $1.05B | $7.09B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $96M | $763M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-12M | $51M |
| Gross Margin | 64.6% | 51.5% |
| Operating Margin | -12.6% | 8.7% |
| Forward P/E | 147.2x | 63.9x |
| Total Debt | $11M | $690M |
| Cash & Equiv. | — | $566M |
BLFS vs RGEN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| BioLife Solutions, … (BLFS) | 100 | 132.2 | +32.2% |
| Repligen Corporation (RGEN) | 100 | 96.0 | -4.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: BLFS vs RGEN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
BLFS has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 1.67
- Rev growth 17.0%, EPS growth 43.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 8.1%
- 11.4% 10Y total return vs RGEN's 379.1%
RGEN is the clearest fit if your priority is value and quality.
- Lower P/E (63.9x vs 147.2x)
- 6.7% margin vs BLFS's -12.6%
- 1.8% ROA vs BLFS's -3.0%, ROIC 2.2% vs -2.7%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 17.0% revenue growth vs RGEN's 16.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (63.9x vs 147.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 6.7% margin vs BLFS's -12.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.67 vs RGEN's 1.76, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | Neither stock pays a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | -0.9% vs RGEN's -3.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 1.8% ROA vs BLFS's -3.0%, ROIC 2.2% vs -2.7% |
BLFS vs RGEN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
BLFS vs RGEN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
RGEN leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
RGEN is the larger business by revenue, generating $763M annually — 7.9x BLFS's $96M. RGEN is the more profitable business, keeping 6.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BLFS's -12.6%. On growth, BLFS holds the edge at +6.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $96M | $763M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$7M | $155M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$12M | $51M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $13M | $104M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +64.6% | +51.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -12.6% | +8.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -12.6% | +6.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +13.3% | +13.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +6.5% | +14.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -70.5% | +50.0% |
Valuation Metrics
BLFS leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.0B | $7.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.1B | $7.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -87.00x | 146.23x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 147.16x | 63.92x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 52.17x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 10.90x | 9.61x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.85x | 3.38x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 52.12x | 75.54x |
Profitability & Efficiency
RGEN leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
RGEN delivers a 2.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $2 in annual profit, vs $-3 for BLFS. BLFS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.03x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to RGEN's 0.33x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), RGEN scores 7/9 vs BLFS's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -3.3% | +2.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -3.0% | +1.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -2.7% | +2.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -3.2% | +2.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.03x | 0.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $11M | $124M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | — | $566M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $11M | $690M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -25.79x | 2.64x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
BLFS leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in BLFS five years ago would be worth $7,155 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,790 for RGEN. Over the past 12 months, BLFS leads with a -0.9% total return vs RGEN's -3.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors BLFS at 4.3% vs RGEN's -7.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -9.0% | -23.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -0.9% | -3.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +13.5% | -19.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -28.5% | -32.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +1142.9% | +379.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +4.3% | -7.0% |
Risk & Volatility
BLFS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
BLFS is the less volatile stock with a 1.67 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RGEN's 1.76 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.67x | 1.76x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $29.62 | $175.77 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $17.86 | $109.52 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +73.4% | +71.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.3 | 55.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 419K | 909K |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates BLFS as "Buy" and RGEN as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 51.7% upside for BLFS (target: $33) vs 33.6% for RGEN (target: $168).
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $33.00 | $168.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 17 | 23 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 2 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% |
BLFS leads in 3 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns). RGEN leads in 2 (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency).
BLFS vs RGEN: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is BLFS or RGEN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, BioLife Solutions, Inc.
(BLFS) is the stronger pick with 17. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 16. 4% for Repligen Corporation (RGEN). Repligen Corporation (RGEN) offers the better valuation at 146. 2x trailing P/E (63. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate BioLife Solutions, Inc. (BLFS) a "Buy" — based on 17 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 — BLFS or RGEN?
On forward P/E, Repligen Corporation is actually cheaper at 63.
9x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — BLFS or RGEN?
Over the past 5 years, BioLife Solutions, Inc.
(BLFS) delivered a total return of -28. 5%, compared to -32. 1% for Repligen Corporation (RGEN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: BLFS returned +1143% versus RGEN's +379. 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 — BLFS or RGEN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), BioLife Solutions, Inc.
(BLFS) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 67β versus Repligen Corporation's 1. 76β — meaning RGEN is approximately 5% more volatile than BLFS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, BioLife Solutions, Inc. (BLFS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 3% versus 33% for Repligen Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — BLFS or RGEN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), BioLife Solutions, Inc.
(BLFS) is pulling ahead at 17. 0% versus 16. 4% for Repligen Corporation (RGEN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Repligen Corporation grew EPS 287. 0% year-over-year, compared to 43. 2% for BioLife Solutions, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, BLFS leads at 8. 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 — BLFS or RGEN?
Repligen Corporation (RGEN) is the more profitable company, earning 6.
6% net margin versus -12. 6% for BioLife Solutions, Inc. — meaning it keeps 6. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: RGEN leads at 8. 1% versus -12. 6% for BLFS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BLFS leads at 64. 6%, 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 BLFS or RGEN more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Repligen Corporation (RGEN) trades at 63.
9x forward P/E versus 147. 2x for BioLife Solutions, Inc. — 83. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for BLFS: 51. 7% to $33. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — BLFS or RGEN?
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 BLFS or RGEN better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, BioLife Solutions, Inc.
(BLFS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+1143% 10Y return). Repligen Corporation (RGEN) carries a higher beta of 1. 76 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (BLFS: +1143%, RGEN: +379. 1%), 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 BLFS and RGEN?
Both stocks operate in the Healthcare sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.