Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
EMBC vs ITGR vs NVCR vs LIVN vs ABT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Devices
Medical - Instruments & Supplies
Medical - Devices
Medical - Devices
EMBC vs ITGR vs NVCR vs LIVN vs ABT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic | Medical - Devices | Medical - Instruments & Supplies | Medical - Devices | Medical - Devices |
| Market Cap | $214M | $3.03B | $1.92B | $3.88B | $151.30B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.04B | $1.85B | $674M | $1.43B | $43.84B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $112M | $142M | $-173M | $107M | $13.98B |
| Gross Margin | 61.4% | 23.3% | 75.2% | 67.5% | 54.0% |
| Operating Margin | 27.7% | 10.4% | -27.2% | 13.4% | 17.8% |
| Forward P/E | 1.3x | 13.5x | — | 16.8x | 15.9x |
| Total Debt | $1.43B | $1.40B | $290M | $473M | $15.28B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $226M | $17M | $103M | $636M | $7.62B |
EMBC vs ITGR vs NVCR vs LIVN vs ABT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 22 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Embecta Corp. (EMBC) | 100 | 10.8 | -89.2% |
| Integer Holdings Co… (ITGR) | 100 | 109.1 | +9.1% |
| NovoCure Limited (NVCR) | 100 | 20.3 | -79.7% |
| LivaNova PLC (LIVN) | 100 | 86.7 | -13.3% |
| Abbott Laboratories (ABT) | 100 | 73.5 | -26.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: EMBC vs ITGR vs NVCR vs LIVN vs ABT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
EMBC is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if value and dividends is your priority.
- Lower P/E (1.3x vs 16.8x)
- 16.5% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs ABT's 2.5%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
ITGR is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 165.1% 10Y total return vs ABT's 173.7%
NVCR is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 8.3%, EPS growth 21.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 6.8%
LIVN ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth and momentum.
- 10.7% revenue growth vs EMBC's -3.8%
- +63.0% vs EMBC's -66.3%
ABT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 11 yrs, beta 0.25, yield 2.5%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.25, Low D/E 31.9%, current ratio 1.67x
- PEG 0.53 vs ITGR's 3.08
- Beta 0.25, yield 2.5%, current ratio 1.67x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 10.7% revenue growth vs EMBC's -3.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (1.3x vs 16.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 31.9% margin vs NVCR's -25.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.25 vs NVCR's 2.20, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 16.5% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs ABT's 2.5%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +63.0% vs EMBC's -66.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 16.6% ROA vs NVCR's -16.5%, ROIC 9.9% vs -16.4% |
EMBC vs ITGR vs NVCR vs LIVN vs ABT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
EMBC vs ITGR vs NVCR vs LIVN vs ABT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
EMBC leads in 2 of 6 categories
ABT leads 1 • LIVN leads 1 • ITGR leads 0 • NVCR leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
EMBC leads this category, winning 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ABT is the larger business by revenue, generating $43.8B annually — 65.0x NVCR's $674M. ABT is the more profitable business, keeping 31.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NVCR's -25.7%. On growth, LIVN holds the edge at +14.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.0B | $1.8B | $674M | $1.4B | $43.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $316M | $328M | -$165M | $220M | $10.9B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $112M | $142M | -$173M | $107M | $14.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $174M | $168M | -$48M | $161M | $6.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +61.4% | +23.3% | +75.2% | +67.5% | +54.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +27.7% | +10.4% | -27.2% | +13.4% | +17.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +10.7% | +7.7% | -25.7% | +7.5% | +31.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +16.7% | +9.1% | -7.1% | +11.2% | +15.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -14.4% | +0.8% | +12.3% | +14.3% | +6.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -2.9% | +172.7% | -100.0% | +106.7% | 0.0% |
Valuation Metrics
EMBC leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 2.2x trailing earnings, EMBC trades at a 93% valuation discount to ITGR's 30.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ABT offers better value at 0.38x vs ITGR's 6.91x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $214M | $3.0B | $1.9B | $3.9B | $151.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.4B | $4.4B | $2.1B | $3.7B | $159.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 2.22x | 30.42x | -13.80x | -15.94x | 11.39x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 1.28x | 13.55x | — | 16.84x | 15.87x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 6.91x | — | — | 0.38x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 3.73x | 13.15x | — | 15.40x | 15.83x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.20x | 1.64x | 2.92x | 2.79x | 3.61x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 1.79x | 5.51x | 3.22x | 3.18x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 1.17x | 28.78x | — | 22.40x | 23.82x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ABT leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ABT delivers a 27.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $27 in annual profit, vs $-51 for NVCR. ABT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.32x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NVCR's 0.85x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ABT scores 7/9 vs LIVN's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | +8.2% | -50.8% | +9.1% | +27.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +10.3% | +4.2% | -16.5% | +4.2% | +16.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +42.7% | +5.4% | -16.4% | +11.5% | +9.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +37.8% | +6.9% | -28.9% | +10.2% | +10.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.80x | 0.85x | 0.39x | 0.32x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.2B | $1.4B | $187M | -$162M | $7.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $226M | $17M | $103M | $636M | $7.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.4B | $1.4B | $290M | $473M | $15.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 39.48x | 5.07x | -96.80x | 3.98x | 19.22x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LIVN leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ITGR five years ago would be worth $9,252 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $875 for NVCR. Over the past 12 months, LIVN leads with a +63.0% total return vs EMBC's -66.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LIVN at 14.6% vs EMBC's -43.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -67.8% | +14.5% | +28.3% | +17.0% | -28.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -66.3% | -26.1% | +1.1% | +63.0% | -33.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -81.6% | +8.8% | -75.7% | +50.5% | -15.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -87.6% | -7.5% | -91.3% | -14.5% | -17.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -87.6% | +165.1% | +30.3% | +46.2% | +173.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -43.1% | +2.9% | -37.6% | +14.6% | -5.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — LIVN and ABT 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 NVCR's 2.20 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. LIVN currently trades 98.6% from its 52-week high vs EMBC's 23.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.31x | 0.72x | 2.20x | 1.29x | 0.25x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $15.55 | $123.78 | $20.06 | $71.92 | $139.06 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $3.45 | $62.00 | $9.82 | $39.36 | $86.15 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +23.2% | +71.0% | +83.9% | +98.6% | +62.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 13.7 | 50.9 | 69.8 | 57.6 | 22.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.3M | 628K | 1.5M | 808K | 10.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — EMBC and ABT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: EMBC as "Sell", ITGR as "Buy", NVCR as "Buy", LIVN as "Buy", ABT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 233.3% upside for EMBC (target: $12) vs 7.0% for LIVN (target: $76). For income investors, EMBC offers the higher dividend yield at 16.50% vs ABT's 2.52%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $12.00 | $98.00 | $33.50 | $75.88 | $128.71 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 4 | 14 | 15 | 14 | 41 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +16.5% | — | — | — | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — | — | — | 11 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.59 | — | — | — | $2.19 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +2.7% | +1.7% | 0.0% | +0.1% | +0.9% |
EMBC leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). ABT leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 2 tied.
EMBC vs ITGR vs NVCR vs LIVN vs ABT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is EMBC or ITGR or NVCR or LIVN or ABT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, LivaNova PLC (LIVN) is the stronger pick with 10.
7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 8% for Embecta Corp. (EMBC). Embecta Corp. (EMBC) offers the better valuation at 2. 2x trailing P/E (1. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Integer Holdings Corporation (ITGR) a "Buy" — based on 14 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 — EMBC or ITGR or NVCR or LIVN or ABT?
On trailing P/E, Embecta Corp.
(EMBC) is the cheapest at 2. 2x versus Integer Holdings Corporation at 30. 4x. On forward P/E, Embecta Corp. is actually cheaper at 1. 3x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Abbott Laboratories wins at 0. 53x versus Integer Holdings Corporation's 3. 08x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — EMBC or ITGR or NVCR or LIVN or ABT?
Over the past 5 years, Integer Holdings Corporation (ITGR) delivered a total return of -7.
5%, compared to -91. 3% for NovoCure Limited (NVCR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ABT returned +173. 7% versus EMBC's -87. 6%. 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 — EMBC or ITGR or NVCR or LIVN or ABT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
25β versus NovoCure Limited's 2. 20β — meaning NVCR is approximately 788% 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 85% for NovoCure Limited — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — EMBC or ITGR or NVCR or LIVN or ABT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), LivaNova PLC (LIVN) is pulling ahead at 10.
7% versus -3. 8% for Embecta Corp. (EMBC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Abbott Laboratories grew EPS 133. 6% year-over-year, compared to -483. 6% for LivaNova PLC. Over a 3-year CAGR, ITGR leads at 11. 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 — EMBC or ITGR or NVCR or LIVN or ABT?
Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the more profitable company, earning 31.
9% net margin versus -20. 8% for NovoCure Limited — meaning it keeps 31. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: EMBC leads at 30. 5% versus -23. 5% for NVCR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NVCR leads at 74. 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.
07Is EMBC or ITGR or NVCR or LIVN or ABT 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, Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 53x versus Integer Holdings Corporation's 3. 08x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Embecta Corp. (EMBC) trades at 1. 3x forward P/E versus 16. 8x for LivaNova PLC — 15. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for EMBC: 233. 3% to $12. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — EMBC or ITGR or NVCR or LIVN or ABT?
In this comparison, EMBC (16.
5% yield), ABT (2. 5% yield) pay a dividend. ITGR, NVCR, LIVN do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is EMBC or ITGR or NVCR or LIVN or ABT 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). NovoCure Limited (NVCR) carries a higher beta of 2. 20 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ABT: +173. 7%, NVCR: +30. 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 EMBC and ITGR and NVCR and LIVN and ABT?
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: EMBC is a small-cap deep-value stock; ITGR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NVCR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; LIVN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ABT is a mid-cap deep-value stock. EMBC, ABT pay a dividend while ITGR, NVCR, LIVN 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.