Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
BNGO vs PACB vs ILMN vs CDNA
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Devices
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
BNGO vs PACB vs ILMN vs CDNA — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Devices | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| Market Cap | $14M | $498M | $21.07B | $1.11B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $29M | $160M | $4.39B | $413M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-26M | $-546M | $853M | $-8M |
| Gross Margin | 47.4% | 28.2% | 67.1% | 48.2% |
| Operating Margin | -116.9% | -346.1% | 20.9% | -3.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 26.8x | 22.8x |
| Total Debt | $7M | $759M | $2.55B | $20M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $3M | $64M | $1.42B | $65M |
BNGO vs PACB vs ILMN vs CDNA — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bionano Genomics, I… (BNGO) | 100 | 0.5 | -99.5% |
| Pacific Biosciences… (PACB) | 100 | 46.9 | -53.1% |
| Illumina, Inc. (ILMN) | 100 | 39.3 | -60.7% |
| CareDx, Inc (CDNA) | 100 | 66.7 | -33.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: BNGO vs PACB vs ILMN vs CDNA
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
BNGO plays a supporting role in this comparison — it may shine differently against other peers.
PACB is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 3.9%, EPS growth -70.1%, 3Y rev CAGR 7.6%
ILMN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and defensive.
- beta 1.23
- Beta 1.23, current ratio 2.08x
- 19.4% margin vs PACB's -341.5%
- Beta 1.23 vs PACB's 2.43, lower leverage
CDNA is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- 385.1% 10Y total return vs ILMN's 0.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.39, Low D/E 6.5%, current ratio 2.86x
- 13.8% revenue growth vs BNGO's -7.4%
- Better valuation composite
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 13.8% revenue growth vs BNGO's -7.4% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 19.4% margin vs PACB's -341.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.23 vs PACB's 2.43, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +81.7% vs BNGO's -64.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.4% ROA vs PACB's -66.8%, ROIC 16.8% vs -45.8% |
BNGO vs PACB vs ILMN vs CDNA — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
BNGO vs PACB vs ILMN vs CDNA — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ILMN leads in 2 of 6 categories
CDNA leads 1 • BNGO leads 0 • PACB leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ILMN leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ILMN is the larger business by revenue, generating $4.4B annually — 154.0x BNGO's $29M. ILMN is the more profitable business, keeping 19.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PACB's -3.4%. On growth, CDNA holds the edge at +39.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $29M | $160M | $4.4B | $413M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$26M | -$169M | $1.1B | $2M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$26M | -$546M | $853M | -$8M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$16M | -$124M | $989M | $65M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +47.4% | +28.2% | +67.1% | +48.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -116.9% | -3.5% | +20.9% | -3.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -92.6% | -3.4% | +19.4% | -2.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -57.3% | -77.4% | +22.5% | +15.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -2.6% | +13.8% | +4.8% | +39.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +100.0% | — | +6.1% | +126.3% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — BNGO and CDNA each lead in 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $14M | $498M | $21.1B | $1.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $18M | $1.2B | $22.2B | $1.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.27x | -0.91x | 25.45x | -53.60x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 26.77x | 22.85x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 6.01x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 19.58x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.50x | 3.11x | 4.86x | 2.92x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.16x | 92.53x | 7.95x | 3.77x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 22.63x | 30.66x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ILMN leads this category, winning 6 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 $-11 for PACB. CDNA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.06x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PACB's 141.98x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ILMN scores 8/9 vs PACB's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -56.2% | -11.2% | +32.8% | -2.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -34.4% | -66.8% | +13.4% | -1.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -49.1% | -45.8% | +16.8% | -5.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -74.1% | -58.0% | +17.6% | -5.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.16x | 141.98x | 0.94x | 0.06x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $4M | $696M | $1.1B | -$46M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $3M | $64M | $1.4B | $65M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $7M | $759M | $2.6B | $20M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -115.65x | -77.95x | 12.09x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CDNA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ILMN five years ago would be worth $3,717 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $4 for BNGO. Over the past 12 months, ILMN leads with a +81.7% total return vs BNGO's -64.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CDNA at 37.7% vs BNGO's -85.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -16.4% | -10.3% | +3.2% | +12.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -64.0% | +46.0% | +81.7% | +45.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.7% | -86.5% | -27.1% | +161.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -93.4% | -62.8% | -72.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -97.8% | -81.3% | +0.7% | +385.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -85.5% | -48.7% | -10.0% | +37.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ILMN and CDNA each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ILMN is the less volatile stock with a 1.23 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than PACB's 2.43 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CDNA currently trades 92.3% from its 52-week high vs BNGO's 24.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.47x | 2.43x | 1.23x | 1.39x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $5.50 | $2.73 | $155.53 | $23.24 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.06 | $0.85 | $73.86 | $10.96 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +24.2% | +60.4% | +89.2% | +92.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 57.5 | 60.2 | 65.2 | 56.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 198K | 5.9M | 1.5M | 667K |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: PACB as "Buy", ILMN as "Buy", CDNA as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 11.9% upside for CDNA (target: $24) vs -39.4% for PACB (target: $1).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $1.00 | $147.38 | $24.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 18 | 50 | 13 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +3.5% | +7.9% |
ILMN leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). CDNA leads in 1 (Total Returns). 2 tied.
BNGO vs PACB vs ILMN vs CDNA: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is BNGO or PACB or ILMN or CDNA a better buy right now?
For growth investors, CareDx, Inc (CDNA) is the stronger pick with 13.
8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -7. 4% for Bionano Genomics, Inc. (BNGO). Illumina, Inc. (ILMN) offers the better valuation at 25. 5x trailing P/E (26. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc. (PACB) a "Buy" — based on 18 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 — BNGO or PACB or ILMN or CDNA?
On forward P/E, CareDx, Inc is actually cheaper at 22.
8x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — BNGO or PACB or ILMN or CDNA?
Over the past 5 years, Illumina, Inc.
(ILMN) delivered a total return of -62. 8%, compared to -100. 0% for Bionano Genomics, Inc. (BNGO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CDNA returned +385. 1% versus BNGO's -97. 8%. 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 — BNGO or PACB or ILMN or CDNA?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Illumina, Inc.
(ILMN) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 23β versus Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc. 's 2. 43β — meaning PACB is approximately 97% more volatile than ILMN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, CareDx, Inc (CDNA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 6% versus 142% for Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — BNGO or PACB or ILMN or CDNA?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), CareDx, Inc (CDNA) is pulling ahead at 13.
8% versus -7. 4% for Bionano Genomics, Inc. (BNGO). 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, PACB leads at 7. 6% 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 — BNGO or PACB or ILMN or CDNA?
Illumina, Inc.
(ILMN) is the more profitable company, earning 19. 6% net margin versus -341. 5% for Pacific Biosciences of California, 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 -348. 5% for PACB. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CDNA leads at 67. 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 BNGO or PACB or ILMN or CDNA more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, CareDx, Inc (CDNA) trades at 22.
8x forward P/E versus 26. 8x for Illumina, Inc. — 3. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CDNA: 11. 9% to $24. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — BNGO or PACB or ILMN 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 BNGO or PACB or ILMN or CDNA better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, CareDx, Inc (CDNA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+385.
1% 10Y return). Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc. (PACB) carries a higher beta of 2. 43 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CDNA: +385. 1%, PACB: -81. 3%), 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 BNGO and PACB and ILMN 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.
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.