Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CRL vs TMO vs DHR vs IQV vs A
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
CRL vs TMO vs DHR vs IQV vs A — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| Market Cap | $8.98B | $176.36B | $124.33B | $30.32B | $33.58B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $4.03B | $45.20B | $24.78B | $16.63B | $7.07B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-185M | $6.86B | $3.69B | $1.39B | $1.29B |
| Gross Margin | 24.9% | 39.4% | 60.7% | 26.1% | 38.8% |
| Operating Margin | 11.8% | 17.8% | 21.0% | 13.9% | 20.6% |
| Forward P/E | 16.4x | 19.1x | 20.8x | 14.1x | 19.9x |
| Total Debt | $3.07B | $40.85B | $18.42B | $16.17B | $3.35B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $214M | $9.86B | $4.62B | $1.98B | $1.79B |
CRL vs TMO vs DHR vs IQV vs A — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Charles River Labor… (CRL) | 100 | 101.3 | +1.3% |
| Thermo Fisher Scien… (TMO) | 100 | 135.9 | +35.9% |
| Danaher Corporation (DHR) | 100 | 118.9 | +18.9% |
| IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) | 100 | 119.5 | +19.5% |
| Agilent Technologie… (A) | 100 | 134.6 | +34.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CRL vs TMO vs DHR vs IQV vs A
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CRL is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if momentum is your priority.
- +32.8% vs DHR's -8.3%
TMO is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 229.1% 10Y total return vs DHR's 219.3%
DHR ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.94, Low D/E 35.1%, current ratio 1.87x
- Beta 0.94 vs CRL's 1.52, lower leverage
IQV is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and valuation efficiency.
- Rev growth 5.9%, EPS growth 4.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 4.2%
- PEG 0.35 vs DHR's 34.35
- Lower P/E (14.1x vs 19.9x), PEG 0.35 vs 1.35
A carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 10 yrs, beta 1.23, yield 0.8%
- Beta 1.23, yield 0.8%, current ratio 1.96x
- 6.7% revenue growth vs CRL's -0.9%
- 18.3% margin vs CRL's -4.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 6.7% revenue growth vs CRL's -0.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.1x vs 19.9x), PEG 0.35 vs 1.35 | |
| Quality / Margins | 18.3% margin vs CRL's -4.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.94 vs CRL's 1.52, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 0.8% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs TMO's 0.4%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +32.8% vs DHR's -8.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 10.1% ROA vs CRL's -2.5%, ROIC 13.5% vs 6.3% |
CRL vs TMO vs DHR vs IQV vs A — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CRL vs TMO vs DHR vs IQV vs A — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
A leads in 2 of 6 categories
DHR leads 1 • IQV leads 1 • CRL leads 1 • TMO leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
DHR leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TMO is the larger business by revenue, generating $45.2B annually — 11.2x CRL's $4.0B. A is the more profitable business, keeping 18.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CRL's -4.6%. On growth, IQV holds the edge at +8.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $4.0B | $45.2B | $24.8B | $16.6B | $7.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $757M | $10.5B | $7.2B | $3.5B | $1.7B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$185M | $6.9B | $3.7B | $1.4B | $1.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $391M | $6.7B | $5.3B | $2.7B | $993M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +24.9% | +39.4% | +60.7% | +26.1% | +38.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +11.8% | +17.8% | +21.0% | +13.9% | +20.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -4.6% | +15.2% | +14.9% | +8.3% | +18.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +9.7% | +14.9% | +21.4% | +16.1% | +14.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +1.2% | +6.2% | +3.7% | +8.4% | +7.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -160.0% | +11.3% | +9.8% | +15.0% | -3.6% |
Valuation Metrics
IQV leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 22.8x trailing earnings, IQV trades at a 35% valuation discount to DHR's 34.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), IQV offers better value at 0.56x vs DHR's 34.35x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $9.0B | $176.4B | $124.3B | $30.3B | $33.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $11.8B | $207.4B | $138.1B | $44.5B | $35.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -62.52x | 26.75x | 34.85x | 22.79x | 25.96x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 16.42x | 19.11x | 20.82x | 14.06x | 19.87x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 12.67x | 34.35x | 0.56x | 1.76x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 12.98x | 19.04x | 18.21x | 12.97x | 19.89x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.24x | 3.96x | 5.06x | 1.86x | 4.83x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.81x | 3.34x | 2.38x | 4.67x | 5.00x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 17.31x | 28.02x | 23.64x | 14.78x | 29.15x |
Profitability & Efficiency
A leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
IQV delivers a 22.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $22 in annual profit, vs $-6 for CRL. DHR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.35x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to IQV's 2.44x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), DHR scores 7/9 vs IQV's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -5.7% | +13.2% | +7.1% | +22.1% | +18.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -2.5% | +6.4% | +4.5% | +4.7% | +10.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +6.3% | +7.5% | +5.9% | +8.7% | +13.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +8.1% | +9.1% | +7.0% | +11.0% | +14.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 6 | 7 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.95x | 0.76x | 0.35x | 2.44x | 0.50x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $2.9B | $31.0B | $13.8B | $14.2B | $1.6B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $214M | $9.9B | $4.6B | $2.0B | $1.8B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $3.1B | $40.9B | $18.4B | $16.2B | $3.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 6.38x | 5.89x | 18.13x | 3.10x | 19.53x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CRL leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in TMO five years ago would be worth $10,283 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $5,311 for CRL. Over the past 12 months, CRL leads with a +32.8% total return vs DHR's -8.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CRL at -1.4% vs DHR's -5.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -10.1% | -19.8% | -23.6% | -20.7% | -13.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +32.8% | +16.8% | -8.3% | +16.5% | +11.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -4.2% | -11.7% | -15.5% | -5.9% | -8.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -46.9% | +2.8% | -21.1% | -23.8% | -8.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +119.2% | +229.1% | +219.3% | +166.5% | +205.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -1.4% | -4.0% | -5.5% | -2.0% | -2.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CRL and DHR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
DHR is the less volatile stock with a 0.94 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CRL's 1.52 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CRL currently trades 79.5% from its 52-week high vs IQV's 72.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.52x | 1.10x | 0.94x | 1.33x | 1.23x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $228.88 | $643.99 | $242.80 | $247.05 | $160.27 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $131.30 | $385.46 | $172.06 | $134.65 | $104.79 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +79.5% | +73.7% | +72.3% | +72.3% | +74.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 57.2 | 43.1 | 33.0 | 58.5 | 52.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 806K | 1.9M | 4.2M | 1.6M | 2.0M |
Analyst Outlook
A leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CRL as "Buy", TMO as "Buy", DHR as "Buy", IQV as "Buy", A as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 40.6% upside for DHR (target: $247) vs 12.9% for CRL (target: $205). For income investors, A offers the higher dividend yield at 0.84% vs TMO's 0.36%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $205.43 | $654.67 | $247.00 | $225.63 | $166.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 36 | 42 | 42 | 44 | 38 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.4% | +0.7% | — | +0.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 8 | 1 | 2 | 10 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.69 | $1.23 | — | $0.99 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +4.0% | +1.7% | +2.5% | +4.1% | +1.3% |
A leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Analyst Outlook). DHR leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 1 tied.
CRL vs TMO vs DHR vs IQV vs A: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CRL or TMO or DHR or IQV or A a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Agilent Technologies, Inc.
(A) is the stronger pick with 6. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -0. 9% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. (CRL). IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) offers the better valuation at 22. 8x trailing P/E (14. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. (CRL) a "Buy" — based on 36 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 — CRL or TMO or DHR or IQV or A?
On trailing P/E, IQVIA Holdings Inc.
(IQV) is the cheapest at 22. 8x versus Danaher Corporation at 34. 9x. On forward P/E, IQVIA Holdings Inc. is actually cheaper at 14. 1x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: IQVIA Holdings Inc. wins at 0. 35x versus Danaher Corporation's 34. 35x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CRL or TMO or DHR or IQV or A?
Over the past 5 years, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.
(TMO) delivered a total return of +2. 8%, compared to -46. 9% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. (CRL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: TMO returned +229. 1% versus CRL's +119. 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 — CRL or TMO or DHR or IQV or A?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Danaher Corporation (DHR) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
94β versus Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. 's 1. 52β — meaning CRL is approximately 62% more volatile than DHR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Danaher Corporation (DHR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 35% versus 2% for IQVIA Holdings Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CRL or TMO or DHR or IQV or A?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Agilent Technologies, Inc.
(A) is pulling ahead at 6. 7% versus -0. 9% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. (CRL). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. grew EPS 7. 3% year-over-year, compared to -1555. 0% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, IQV leads at 4. 2% 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 — CRL or TMO or DHR or IQV or A?
Agilent Technologies, Inc.
(A) is the more profitable company, earning 18. 8% net margin versus -3. 6% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. — meaning it keeps 18. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: A leads at 21. 3% versus 12. 6% for CRL. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — DHR leads at 60. 9%, 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 CRL or TMO or DHR or IQV or A 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, IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 35x versus Danaher Corporation's 34. 35x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) trades at 14. 1x forward P/E versus 20. 8x for Danaher Corporation — 6. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for DHR: 40. 6% to $247. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — CRL or TMO or DHR or IQV or A?
In this comparison, A (0.
8% yield), DHR (0. 7% yield), TMO (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. CRL, IQV do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CRL or TMO or DHR or IQV or A better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Danaher Corporation (DHR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
94), 0. 7% yield, +219. 3% 10Y return). Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. (CRL) carries a higher beta of 1. 52 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (DHR: +219. 3%, CRL: +119. 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 CRL and TMO and DHR and IQV and A?
Both stocks operate in the Healthcare sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
DHR, A pay a dividend while CRL, TMO, IQV do 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.