Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
BLLN vs NTRA vs ILMN vs PGNY vs CDNA
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Healthcare Information Services
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
BLLN vs NTRA vs ILMN vs PGNY vs CDNA — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Healthcare Information Services | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| Market Cap | $4.65B | $30.37B | $24.45B | $2.09B | $1.19B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $355M | $2.50B | $4.39B | $1.29B | $413M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $25M | $-226M | $853M | $68M | $-8M |
| Gross Margin | 70.4% | 65.2% | 67.1% | 24.1% | 48.2% |
| Operating Margin | 10.2% | -13.0% | 20.9% | 7.5% | -3.3% |
| Forward P/E | 102.7x | — | 30.8x | 20.8x | 24.6x |
| Total Debt | $109M | $214M | $2.55B | $24M | $20M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $496M | $1.08B | $1.42B | $112M | $65M |
BLLN vs NTRA vs ILMN vs PGNY vs CDNA — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Natera, Inc. (NTRA) | 100 | 425.3 | +325.3% |
| Illumina, Inc. (ILMN) | 100 | 44.7 | -55.3% |
| Progyny, Inc. (PGNY) | 100 | 103.2 | +3.2% |
| CareDx, Inc (CDNA) | 100 | 64.8 | -35.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: BLLN vs NTRA vs ILMN vs PGNY vs CDNA
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
BLLN ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 100.0%, EPS growth 106.8%
- 100.0% revenue growth vs ILMN's -0.8%
NTRA is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 17.3% 10Y total return vs PGNY's 67.1%
ILMN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for quality and momentum.
- 19.4% margin vs NTRA's -9.0%
- +82.7% vs BLLN's -7.2%
- 13.4% ROA vs NTRA's -10.4%, ROIC 16.8% vs -36.1%
PGNY is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- beta 0.61
- Lower volatility, beta 0.61, Low D/E 4.7%, current ratio 2.73x
- PEG 3.11 vs ILMN's 7.29
- Beta 0.61, current ratio 2.73x
Among these 5 stocks, CDNA doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 100.0% revenue growth vs ILMN's -0.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (20.8x vs 24.6x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 19.4% margin vs NTRA's -9.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.61 vs BLLN's 1.91, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 5 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +82.7% vs BLLN's -7.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.4% ROA vs NTRA's -10.4%, ROIC 16.8% vs -36.1% |
BLLN vs NTRA vs ILMN vs PGNY vs CDNA — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
BLLN vs NTRA vs ILMN vs PGNY vs CDNA — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
PGNY leads in 1 of 6 categories
ILMN leads 1 • NTRA leads 1 • BLLN leads 0 • CDNA leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — BLLN and ILMN each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ILMN is the larger business by revenue, generating $4.4B annually — 12.4x BLLN's $355M. ILMN is the more profitable business, keeping 19.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NTRA's -9.0%. On growth, BLLN holds the edge at +83.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $355M | $2.5B | $4.4B | $1.3B | $413M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $44M | -$313M | $1.1B | $100M | $2M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $25M | -$226M | $853M | $68M | -$8M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $28M | $92M | $989M | $181M | $65M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +70.4% | +65.2% | +67.1% | +24.1% | +48.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +10.2% | -13.0% | +20.9% | +7.5% | -3.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +7.1% | -9.0% | +19.4% | +5.2% | -2.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +7.9% | +3.7% | +22.5% | +14.0% | +15.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +83.8% | +38.8% | +4.8% | +1.4% | +39.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +4.8% | -20.0% | +6.1% | +70.6% | +126.3% |
Valuation Metrics
PGNY leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 29.5x trailing earnings, ILMN trades at a 98% valuation discount to BLLN's 1587.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), PGNY offers better value at 6.12x vs ILMN's 6.98x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4.7B | $30.4B | $24.5B | $2.1B | $1.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $4.3B | $29.5B | $25.6B | $2.0B | $1.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 1587.44x | -139.52x | 29.54x | 40.97x | -57.42x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 102.72x | — | 30.83x | 20.82x | 24.59x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 6.98x | 6.12x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 266.12x | — | 22.56x | 22.14x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 15.24x | 13.17x | 5.64x | 1.62x | 3.12x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 9.65x | 16.93x | 9.22x | 4.62x | 4.04x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 295.98x | 278.35x | 26.26x | 10.88x | 32.85x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ILMN leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ILMN delivers a 32.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $33 in annual profit, vs $-15 for NTRA. PGNY carries lower financial leverage with a 0.05x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to ILMN's 0.94x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ILMN scores 8/9 vs CDNA's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +7.6% | -15.1% | +32.8% | +13.3% | -2.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +5.1% | -10.4% | +13.4% | +9.0% | -1.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +13.5% | -36.1% | +16.8% | +18.1% | -5.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +3.7% | -18.3% | +17.6% | +17.4% | -5.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 5 | 8 | 6 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.23x | 0.13x | 0.94x | 0.05x | 0.06x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$387M | -$862M | $1.1B | -$88M | -$46M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $496M | $1.1B | $1.4B | $112M | $65M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $109M | $214M | $2.6B | $24M | $20M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 516.43x | -34.29x | 12.09x | — | — |
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 $20,440 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,538 for CDNA. Over the past 12 months, ILMN leads with a +82.7% total return vs BLLN's -7.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NTRA at 62.4% vs PGNY's -12.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +13.2% | -7.3% | +19.8% | +3.5% | +20.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -7.2% | +29.0% | +82.7% | +23.6% | +22.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -7.2% | +328.7% | -20.4% | -32.6% | +176.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -7.2% | +104.4% | -63.4% | -58.7% | -74.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -7.2% | +1731.3% | +18.6% | +67.1% | +388.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -2.5% | +62.4% | -7.3% | -12.3% | +40.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — PGNY and CDNA each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
PGNY is the less volatile stock with a 0.61 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BLLN's 1.91 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CDNA currently trades 95.2% from its 52-week high vs BLLN's 72.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.91x | 1.24x | 0.99x | 0.61x | 1.17x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $138.70 | $256.36 | $177.22 | $28.75 | $24.13 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $61.96 | $131.81 | $85.77 | $16.10 | $10.96 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +72.9% | +82.7% | +90.8% | +92.6% | +95.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 56.5 | 55.9 | 66.4 | 64.6 | 64.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 642K | 1.4M | 1.7M | 1.4M | 694K |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: BLLN as "Buy", NTRA as "Buy", ILMN as "Buy", PGNY as "Buy", CDNA as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 23.6% upside for BLLN (target: $125) vs -5.9% for ILMN (target: $151).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $125.00 | $261.00 | $151.40 | $30.33 | $24.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 4 | 27 | 50 | 20 | 13 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +3.0% | +3.9% | +7.4% |
PGNY leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). ILMN leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 2 tied.
BLLN vs NTRA vs ILMN vs PGNY vs CDNA: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is BLLN or NTRA or ILMN or PGNY or CDNA a better buy right now?
For growth investors, BillionToOne, Inc.
(BLLN) is the stronger pick with 100. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -0. 8% for Illumina, Inc. (ILMN). Illumina, Inc. (ILMN) offers the better valuation at 29. 5x trailing P/E (30. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate BillionToOne, Inc. (BLLN) a "Buy" — based on 4 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 — BLLN or NTRA or ILMN or PGNY or CDNA?
On trailing P/E, Illumina, Inc.
(ILMN) is the cheapest at 29. 5x versus BillionToOne, Inc. at 1587. 4x. On forward P/E, Progyny, Inc. is actually cheaper at 20. 8x — 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: Progyny, Inc. wins at 3. 11x versus Illumina, Inc. 's 7. 29x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — BLLN or NTRA or ILMN or PGNY or CDNA?
Over the past 5 years, Natera, Inc.
(NTRA) delivered a total return of +104. 4%, compared to -74. 6% for CareDx, Inc (CDNA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NTRA returned +1731% versus BLLN's -7. 2%. 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 — BLLN or NTRA or ILMN or PGNY or CDNA?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Progyny, Inc.
(PGNY) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 61β versus BillionToOne, Inc. 's 1. 91β — meaning BLLN is approximately 214% more volatile than PGNY relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Progyny, Inc. (PGNY) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 5% versus 94% for Illumina, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — BLLN or NTRA or ILMN or PGNY or CDNA?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), BillionToOne, Inc.
(BLLN) is pulling ahead at 100. 0% versus -0. 8% for Illumina, Inc. (ILMN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Illumina, Inc. grew EPS 170. 9% year-over-year, compared to -143. 0% for CareDx, 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 — BLLN or NTRA or ILMN or PGNY or CDNA?
Illumina, Inc.
(ILMN) is the more profitable company, earning 19. 6% net margin versus -9. 0% for Natera, Inc. — meaning it keeps 19. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ILMN leads at 19. 9% versus -13. 4% for NTRA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BLLN leads at 68. 3%, 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 BLLN or NTRA or ILMN or PGNY or CDNA 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, Progyny, Inc. (PGNY) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 3. 11x versus Illumina, Inc. 's 7. 29x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Progyny, Inc. (PGNY) trades at 20. 8x forward P/E versus 102. 7x for BillionToOne, Inc. — 81. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for BLLN: 23. 6% to $125. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — BLLN or NTRA or ILMN or PGNY or CDNA?
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 BLLN or NTRA or ILMN or PGNY or CDNA better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Natera, Inc.
(NTRA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 24), +1731% 10Y return). BillionToOne, Inc. (BLLN) carries a higher beta of 1. 91 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (NTRA: +1731%, BLLN: -7. 2%), 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 BLLN and NTRA and ILMN and PGNY and CDNA?
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: BLLN is a small-cap high-growth stock; NTRA is a mid-cap high-growth stock; ILMN is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; PGNY is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CDNA 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.