Medical - Devices
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
BVS vs JNJ vs SYK vs MDT vs ZBH
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Drug Manufacturers - General
Medical - Devices
Medical - Devices
Medical - Devices
BVS vs JNJ vs SYK vs MDT vs ZBH — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Devices | Drug Manufacturers - General | Medical - Devices | Medical - Devices | Medical - Devices |
| Market Cap | $576M | $543.02B | $116.84B | $94.62B | $16.12B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $576M | $92.15B | $25.12B | $35.48B | $8.41B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $28M | $25.12B | $3.25B | $4.61B | $761M |
| Gross Margin | 67.7% | 68.1% | 63.5% | 61.9% | 70.0% |
| Operating Margin | 10.6% | 26.1% | 22.4% | 17.9% | 15.6% |
| Forward P/E | 11.0x | 19.5x | 20.4x | 13.4x | 9.7x |
| Total Debt | $311M | $36.63B | $14.86B | $28.52B | $7.52B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $51M | $24.11B | $4.01B | $2.22B | $592M |
BVS vs JNJ vs SYK vs MDT vs ZBH — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Feb 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bioventus Inc. (BVS) | 100 | 69.9 | -30.1% |
| Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) | 100 | 142.2 | +42.2% |
| Stryker Corporation (SYK) | 100 | 125.7 | +25.7% |
| Medtronic plc (MDT) | 100 | 63.1 | -36.9% |
| Zimmer Biomet Holdi… (ZBH) | 100 | 52.0 | -48.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: BVS vs JNJ vs SYK vs MDT vs ZBH
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
BVS lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
JNJ carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 36 yrs, beta 0.06, yield 2.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.06, Low D/E 51.2%, current ratio 1.11x
- 27.3% margin vs BVS's 4.9%
- Beta 0.06 vs BVS's 1.23, lower leverage
SYK is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 11.2%, EPS growth 8.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 10.8%
- 197.3% 10Y total return vs JNJ's 137.4%
- PEG 1.37 vs JNJ's 34.63
- 11.2% revenue growth vs BVS's -0.9%
MDT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for defensive.
- Beta 0.34, yield 3.8%, current ratio 1.85x
- 3.8% yield, 36-year raise streak, vs SYK's 1.1%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
- 175.8% ROA vs ZBH's 3.3%, ROIC 6.0% vs 5.4%
Among these 5 stocks, ZBH doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 11.2% revenue growth vs BVS's -0.9% | |
| Value | PEG 1.37 vs 34.09 | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.3% margin vs BVS's 4.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.06 vs BVS's 1.23, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.8% yield, 36-year raise streak, vs SYK's 1.1%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +50.1% vs SYK's -19.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 175.8% ROA vs ZBH's 3.3%, ROIC 6.0% vs 5.4% |
BVS vs JNJ vs SYK vs MDT vs ZBH — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
BVS vs JNJ vs SYK vs MDT vs ZBH — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
BVS leads in 2 of 6 categories
JNJ leads 2 • MDT leads 1 • SYK leads 0 • ZBH leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — JNJ and ZBH each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JNJ is the larger business by revenue, generating $92.1B annually — 159.9x BVS's $576M. JNJ is the more profitable business, keeping 27.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BVS's 4.9%. On growth, SYK holds the edge at +11.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $576M | $92.1B | $25.1B | $35.5B | $8.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $107M | $31.4B | $6.3B | $9.4B | $2.3B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $28M | $25.1B | $3.2B | $4.6B | $761M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $101M | $19.1B | $4.3B | $5.4B | $1.8B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +67.7% | +68.1% | +63.5% | +61.9% | +70.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +10.6% | +26.1% | +22.4% | +17.9% | +15.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +4.9% | +27.3% | +12.9% | +13.0% | +9.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +17.5% | +20.7% | +17.1% | +15.2% | +21.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +6.6% | +6.8% | +11.4% | +8.8% | +9.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +2.1% | +91.0% | +56.0% | -11.9% | +34.1% |
Valuation Metrics
BVS leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 20.4x trailing earnings, MDT trades at a 47% valuation discount to JNJ's 38.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), SYK offers better value at 2.44x vs JNJ's 34.63x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $576M | $543.0B | $116.8B | $94.6B | $16.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $836M | $555.6B | $127.7B | $120.9B | $23.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 25.79x | 38.92x | 36.32x | 20.45x | 23.19x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 10.97x | 19.46x | 20.37x | 13.38x | 9.71x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 34.63x | 2.44x | 34.09x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 7.92x | 18.84x | 21.00x | 13.72x | 9.38x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.01x | 6.11x | 4.65x | 2.82x | 1.96x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.57x | 7.66x | 5.20x | 1.97x | 1.29x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 8.06x | 27.37x | 27.28x | 18.25x | 10.95x |
Profitability & Efficiency
JNJ leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
JNJ delivers a 31.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $32 in annual profit, vs $6 for ZBH. JNJ carries lower financial leverage with a 0.51x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to BVS's 1.36x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BVS scores 7/9 vs ZBH's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +13.1% | +31.7% | +15.0% | +9.4% | +5.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +4.2% | +13.0% | +6.9% | +175.8% | +3.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +9.1% | +20.7% | +11.4% | +6.0% | +5.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +11.3% | +17.6% | +13.0% | +7.5% | +6.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.36x | 0.51x | 0.66x | 0.59x | 0.59x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $260M | $12.5B | $10.8B | $26.3B | $6.9B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $51M | $24.1B | $4.0B | $2.2B | $592M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $311M | $36.6B | $14.9B | $28.5B | $7.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 2.72x | 48.23x | 6.72x | 9.08x | 4.08x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
BVS leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in JNJ five years ago would be worth $15,060 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $4,754 for BVS. Over the past 12 months, JNJ leads with a +50.1% total return vs SYK's -19.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors BVS at 43.0% vs ZBH's -12.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +18.0% | +9.9% | -12.1% | -22.4% | -8.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +29.7% | +50.1% | -19.3% | -7.0% | -10.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +192.4% | +55.7% | +16.0% | -0.4% | -32.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -52.5% | +50.6% | +25.3% | -29.9% | -46.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -55.7% | +137.4% | +197.3% | +21.1% | -22.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +43.0% | +15.9% | +5.1% | -0.1% | -12.3% |
Risk & Volatility
JNJ leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
JNJ is the less volatile stock with a 0.06 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BVS's 1.23 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. JNJ currently trades 89.5% from its 52-week high vs MDT's 69.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.23x | 0.06x | 0.45x | 0.34x | 0.48x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $11.25 | $251.71 | $404.87 | $106.33 | $108.29 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $5.81 | $149.04 | $281.00 | $73.67 | $79.12 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +75.6% | +89.5% | +75.4% | +69.4% | +76.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 34.5 | 51.5 | 45.8 | 35.3 | 41.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 499K | 6.5M | 2.3M | 8.3M | 2.2M |
Analyst Outlook
MDT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: BVS as "Buy", JNJ as "Buy", SYK as "Buy", MDT as "Buy", ZBH as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 52.8% upside for BVS (target: $13) vs 11.2% for JNJ (target: $251). For income investors, MDT offers the higher dividend yield at 3.77% vs SYK's 1.10%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $13.00 | $250.58 | $385.83 | $107.25 | $96.33 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 6 | 40 | 50 | 49 | 42 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +2.2% | +1.1% | +3.8% | +1.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 36 | 34 | 36 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $4.87 | $3.36 | $2.78 | $0.96 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.4% | 0.0% | +3.4% | +3.0% |
BVS leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns). JNJ leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Risk & Volatility). 1 tied.
BVS vs JNJ vs SYK vs MDT vs ZBH: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is BVS or JNJ or SYK or MDT or ZBH a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Stryker Corporation (SYK) is the stronger pick with 11.
2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -0. 9% for Bioventus Inc. (BVS). Medtronic plc (MDT) offers the better valuation at 20. 4x trailing P/E (13. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Bioventus Inc. (BVS) a "Buy" — based on 6 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 — BVS or JNJ or SYK or MDT or ZBH?
On trailing P/E, Medtronic plc (MDT) is the cheapest at 20.
4x versus Johnson & Johnson at 38. 9x. On forward P/E, Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc. is actually cheaper at 9. 7x — 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: Stryker Corporation wins at 1. 37x versus Johnson & Johnson's 34. 63x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — BVS or JNJ or SYK or MDT or ZBH?
Over the past 5 years, Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) delivered a total return of +50.
6%, compared to -52. 5% for Bioventus Inc. (BVS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: SYK returned +197. 3% versus BVS's -55. 7%. 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 — BVS or JNJ or SYK or MDT or ZBH?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
06β versus Bioventus Inc. 's 1. 23β — meaning BVS is approximately 1991% more volatile than JNJ relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 51% versus 136% for Bioventus Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — BVS or JNJ or SYK or MDT or ZBH?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Stryker Corporation (SYK) is pulling ahead at 11.
2% versus -0. 9% for Bioventus Inc. (BVS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Bioventus Inc. grew EPS 163. 5% year-over-year, compared to -57. 8% for Johnson & Johnson. Over a 3-year CAGR, SYK leads at 10. 8% 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 — BVS or JNJ or SYK or MDT or ZBH?
Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) is the more profitable company, earning 15.
8% net margin versus 4. 0% for Bioventus Inc. — meaning it keeps 15. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: JNJ leads at 24. 9% versus 10. 3% for BVS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — JNJ leads at 69. 1%, 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 BVS or JNJ or SYK or MDT or ZBH 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, Stryker Corporation (SYK) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 37x versus Johnson & Johnson's 34. 63x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc. (ZBH) trades at 9. 7x forward P/E versus 20. 4x for Stryker Corporation — 10. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for BVS: 52. 8% to $13. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — BVS or JNJ or SYK or MDT or ZBH?
In this comparison, MDT (3.
8% yield), JNJ (2. 2% yield), ZBH (1. 2% yield), SYK (1. 1% yield) pay a dividend. BVS does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is BVS or JNJ or SYK or MDT or ZBH better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
06), 2. 2% yield, +137. 4% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (JNJ: +137. 4%, BVS: -55. 7%), 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 BVS and JNJ and SYK and MDT and ZBH?
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: BVS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; JNJ is a large-cap quality compounder stock; SYK is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; MDT is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; ZBH is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. JNJ, SYK, MDT, ZBH pay a dividend while BVS 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.