CTSO vs LMAT

For growth investors, Cytosorbents Corporation (CTSO) is the stronger pick with 14.

5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 13. 5% for LeMaitre Vascular, Inc. (LMAT). LeMaitre Vascular, Inc. (LMAT) offers the better valuation at 42. 8x trailing P/E (37. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate LeMaitre Vascular, Inc. (LMAT) a "Buy" — based on 20 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.

Over the past 5 years, LeMaitre Vascular, Inc.

(LMAT) delivered a total return of +118. 2%, compared to -92. 8% for Cytosorbents Corporation (CTSO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LMAT returned +608. 6% versus CTSO's -86. 4%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), LeMaitre Vascular, Inc.

(LMAT) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 57β versus Cytosorbents Corporation's 0. 92β — meaning CTSO is approximately 61% more volatile than LMAT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, LeMaitre Vascular, Inc. (LMAT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 47% versus 2% for Cytosorbents Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Cytosorbents Corporation (CTSO) is pulling ahead at 14.

5% versus 13. 5% for LeMaitre Vascular, Inc. (LMAT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Cytosorbents Corporation grew EPS 41. 5% year-over-year, compared to 30. 6% for LeMaitre Vascular, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, LMAT leads at 15. 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.

LeMaitre Vascular, Inc.

(LMAT) is the more profitable company, earning 23. 1% net margin versus -58. 2% for Cytosorbents Corporation — meaning it keeps 23. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LMAT leads at 27. 2% versus -47. 2% for CTSO. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — LMAT leads at 71. 5%, 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.

In this comparison, LMAT (0.

7% yield) pays a dividend. CTSO does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, LeMaitre Vascular, Inc.

(LMAT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 57), 0. 7% yield, +608. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (LMAT: +608. 6%, CTSO: -86. 4%), 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.

Both stocks operate in the Healthcare sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

LMAT pays a dividend while CTSO 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.