Medical - Devices
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
DXCM vs PODD vs ABT vs TNDM vs MDT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Devices
Medical - Devices
Medical - Devices
Medical - Devices
DXCM vs PODD vs ABT vs TNDM vs MDT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Devices | Medical - Devices | Medical - Devices | Medical - Devices | Medical - Devices |
| Market Cap | $23.50B | $11.26B | $151.30B | $1.27B | $99.94B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $4.82B | $2.90B | $43.84B | $1.03B | $35.48B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $930M | $303M | $13.98B | $-95M | $4.61B |
| Gross Margin | 61.8% | 71.0% | 54.0% | 54.9% | 61.9% |
| Operating Margin | 21.4% | 17.5% | 17.8% | -7.9% | 17.9% |
| Forward P/E | 24.5x | 25.2x | 15.9x | — | 14.1x |
| Total Debt | $1.39B | $1.05B | $15.28B | $444M | $28.52B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $918M | $716M | $7.62B | $91M | $2.22B |
DXCM vs PODD vs ABT vs TNDM vs MDT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| DexCom, Inc. (DXCM) | 100 | 64.4 | -35.6% |
| Insulet Corporation (PODD) | 100 | 85.1 | -14.9% |
| Abbott Laboratories (ABT) | 100 | 91.7 | -8.3% |
| Tandem Diabetes Car… (TNDM) | 100 | 22.2 | -77.8% |
| Medtronic plc (MDT) | 100 | 79.1 | -20.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: DXCM vs PODD vs ABT vs TNDM vs MDT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
DXCM lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
PODD ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 30.7%, EPS growth -39.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 27.5%
- 439.0% 10Y total return vs ABT's 173.7%
- PEG 0.24 vs MDT's 36.00
- 30.7% revenue growth vs MDT's 3.6%
ABT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.25, Low D/E 31.9%, current ratio 1.67x
- 31.9% margin vs TNDM's -9.2%
- Beta 0.25 vs TNDM's 1.45, lower leverage
Among these 5 stocks, TNDM doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
MDT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 36 yrs, beta 0.47, yield 3.6%
- Beta 0.47, yield 3.6%, current ratio 1.85x
- Better valuation composite
- 3.6% yield, 36-year raise streak, vs ABT's 2.5%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 30.7% revenue growth vs MDT's 3.6% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 31.9% margin vs TNDM's -9.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.25 vs TNDM's 1.45, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.6% yield, 36-year raise streak, vs ABT's 2.5%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | -2.8% vs PODD's -39.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 175.8% ROA vs TNDM's -10.0%, ROIC 6.0% vs -10.0% |
DXCM vs PODD vs ABT vs TNDM vs MDT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
DXCM vs PODD vs ABT vs TNDM vs MDT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MDT leads in 3 of 6 categories
PODD leads 1 • DXCM leads 1 • ABT leads 0 • TNDM leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PODD leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ABT is the larger business by revenue, generating $43.8B annually — 42.7x TNDM's $1.0B. ABT is the more profitable business, keeping 31.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to TNDM's -9.2%. On growth, PODD holds the edge at +33.9% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $4.8B | $2.9B | $43.8B | $1.0B | $35.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $1.2B | $582M | $10.9B | -$68M | $9.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $930M | $303M | $14.0B | -$95M | $4.6B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $1.4B | $416M | $6.9B | -$4M | $5.4B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +61.8% | +71.0% | +54.0% | +54.9% | +61.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +21.4% | +17.5% | +17.8% | -7.9% | +17.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +19.3% | +10.4% | +31.9% | -9.2% | +13.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +29.7% | +14.3% | +15.8% | -0.4% | +15.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +15.0% | +33.9% | +6.9% | +5.5% | +8.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +88.9% | +160.0% | 0.0% | +84.8% | -11.9% |
Valuation Metrics
MDT leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 11.4x trailing earnings, ABT trades at a 75% valuation discount to PODD's 46.1x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ABT offers better value at 0.38x vs MDT's 36.00x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $23.5B | $11.3B | $151.3B | $1.3B | $99.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $24.0B | $11.6B | $159.0B | $1.6B | $126.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 29.14x | 46.09x | 11.39x | -6.08x | 21.60x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 24.47x | 25.23x | 15.87x | — | 14.13x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 2.78x | 0.45x | 0.38x | — | 36.00x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 20.60x | 19.76x | 15.83x | — | 14.32x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 5.04x | 4.16x | 3.61x | 1.25x | 2.98x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 8.99x | 7.61x | 3.18x | 8.01x | 2.08x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 21.82x | 29.81x | 23.82x | — | 19.28x |
Profitability & Efficiency
DXCM leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
DXCM delivers a 33.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $34 in annual profit, vs $-68 for TNDM. ABT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.32x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to TNDM's 2.86x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), DXCM scores 8/9 vs TNDM's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +33.8% | +21.4% | +27.3% | -68.3% | +9.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +13.4% | +9.6% | +16.6% | -10.0% | +175.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +18.7% | +20.1% | +9.9% | -10.0% | +6.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +23.5% | +18.7% | +10.8% | -11.5% | +7.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 3 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.51x | 0.69x | 0.32x | 2.86x | 0.59x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $472M | $335M | $7.7B | $354M | $26.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $918M | $716M | $7.6B | $91M | $2.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.4B | $1.1B | $15.3B | $444M | $28.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 57.21x | 7.39x | 19.22x | -15.99x | 9.08x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MDT leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ABT five years ago would be worth $8,209 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,195 for TNDM. Over the past 12 months, MDT leads with a -2.8% total return vs PODD's -39.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MDT at -1.4% vs PODD's -20.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -8.5% | -43.3% | -28.9% | -14.3% | -18.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -26.9% | -39.3% | -33.2% | -17.0% | -2.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -49.3% | -49.7% | -15.4% | -44.8% | -4.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -32.1% | -31.5% | -17.9% | -78.0% | -27.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +290.2% | +439.0% | +173.7% | -75.4% | +26.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -20.3% | -20.5% | -5.4% | -18.0% | -1.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ABT and MDT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ABT is the less volatile stock with a 0.25 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than TNDM's 1.45 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MDT currently trades 73.3% from its 52-week high vs PODD's 45.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.06x | 0.68x | 0.25x | 1.45x | 0.47x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $89.98 | $354.88 | $139.06 | $29.65 | $106.33 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $54.11 | $148.31 | $86.15 | $9.98 | $77.16 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +67.7% | +45.2% | +62.6% | +62.3% | +73.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 43.6 | 22.4 | 22.9 | 39.1 | 27.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 3.9M | 1.1M | 10.5M | 1.8M | 7.8M |
Analyst Outlook
MDT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: DXCM as "Buy", PODD as "Buy", ABT as "Buy", TNDM as "Buy", MDT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 111.3% upside for PODD (target: $339) vs 32.8% for DXCM (target: $81). For income investors, MDT offers the higher dividend yield at 3.57% vs ABT's 2.52%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $80.88 | $339.00 | $128.71 | $31.62 | $109.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 52 | 50 | 41 | 39 | 49 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +2.5% | — | +3.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 11 | — | 36 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $2.19 | — | $2.78 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +2.1% | +0.5% | +0.9% | 0.0% | +3.2% |
MDT leads in 3 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns). PODD leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 1 tied.
DXCM vs PODD vs ABT vs TNDM vs MDT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is DXCM or PODD or ABT or TNDM or MDT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Insulet Corporation (PODD) is the stronger pick with 30.
7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 6% for Medtronic plc (MDT). Abbott Laboratories (ABT) offers the better valuation at 11. 4x trailing P/E (15. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate DexCom, Inc. (DXCM) a "Buy" — based on 52 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 — DXCM or PODD or ABT or TNDM or MDT?
On trailing P/E, Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the cheapest at 11.
4x versus Insulet Corporation at 46. 1x. On forward P/E, Medtronic plc is actually cheaper at 14. 1x — 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: Insulet Corporation wins at 0. 24x versus Medtronic plc's 36. 00x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — DXCM or PODD or ABT or TNDM or MDT?
Over the past 5 years, Abbott Laboratories (ABT) delivered a total return of -17.
9%, compared to -78. 0% for Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc. (TNDM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PODD returned +439. 0% versus TNDM's -75. 4%. 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 — DXCM or PODD or ABT or TNDM or MDT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
25β versus Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc. 's 1. 45β — meaning TNDM is approximately 485% more volatile than ABT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Abbott Laboratories (ABT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 32% versus 3% for Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — DXCM or PODD or ABT or TNDM or MDT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Insulet Corporation (PODD) is pulling ahead at 30.
7% versus 3. 6% for Medtronic plc (MDT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Abbott Laboratories grew EPS 133. 6% year-over-year, compared to -106. 8% for Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, PODD leads at 27. 5% 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 — DXCM or PODD or ABT or TNDM or MDT?
Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the more profitable company, earning 31.
9% net margin versus -20. 2% for Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc. — meaning it keeps 31. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: DXCM leads at 19. 6% versus -7. 7% for TNDM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — PODD leads at 71. 6%, 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 DXCM or PODD or ABT or TNDM or MDT 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, Insulet Corporation (PODD) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 24x versus Medtronic plc's 36. 00x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Medtronic plc (MDT) trades at 14. 1x forward P/E versus 25. 2x for Insulet Corporation — 11. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PODD: 111. 3% to $339. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — DXCM or PODD or ABT or TNDM or MDT?
In this comparison, MDT (3.
6% yield), ABT (2. 5% yield) pay a dividend. DXCM, PODD, TNDM do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is DXCM or PODD or ABT or TNDM or MDT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
25), 2. 5% yield, +173. 7% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ABT: +173. 7%, TNDM: -75. 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.
10What are the main differences between DXCM and PODD and ABT and TNDM and MDT?
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: DXCM is a mid-cap high-growth stock; PODD is a mid-cap high-growth stock; ABT is a mid-cap deep-value stock; TNDM is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MDT is a mid-cap income-oriented stock. ABT, MDT pay a dividend while DXCM, PODD, TNDM 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.