Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
EMBC vs LFUS vs CTS vs UTMD
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Medical - Instruments & Supplies
EMBC vs LFUS vs CTS vs UTMD — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Medical - Instruments & Supplies |
| Market Cap | $214M | $11.11B | $1.71B | $210M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.04B | $2.49B | $556M | $39M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $112M | $-40M | $69M | $11M |
| Gross Margin | 61.4% | 38.3% | 38.7% | 52.9% |
| Operating Margin | 27.7% | 2.8% | 15.9% | 29.6% |
| Forward P/E | 1.3x | 33.8x | 24.6x | 10.4x |
| Total Debt | $1.43B | $946M | $122M | $225K |
| Cash & Equiv. | $226M | $563M | $82M | $86M |
EMBC vs LFUS vs CTS vs UTMD — 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% |
| Littelfuse, Inc. (LFUS) | 100 | 177.0 | +77.0% |
| CTS Corporation (CTS) | 100 | 169.4 | +69.4% |
| Utah Medical Produc… (UTMD) | 100 | 72.8 | -27.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: EMBC vs LFUS vs CTS vs UTMD
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
EMBC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth -3.8%, EPS growth 20.9%, 3Y rev CAGR -1.5%
- Lower P/E (1.3x vs 10.4x)
- 16.5% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs LFUS's 0.7%
- 10.3% ROA vs LFUS's -1.0%, ROIC 42.7% vs 1.0%
LFUS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 317.6% 10Y total return vs CTS's 253.2%
- 8.9% revenue growth vs UTMD's -5.8%
- +132.6% vs EMBC's -66.3%
CTS is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 1.58 vs UTMD's 3.03
UTMD is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 3 yrs, beta 0.55, yield 1.9%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.55, Low D/E 0.2%, current ratio 37.62x
- Beta 0.55, yield 1.9%, current ratio 37.62x
- 29.3% margin vs LFUS's -1.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 8.9% revenue growth vs UTMD's -5.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (1.3x vs 10.4x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 29.3% margin vs LFUS's -1.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.55 vs LFUS's 1.76, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 16.5% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs LFUS's 0.7% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +132.6% vs EMBC's -66.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 10.3% ROA vs LFUS's -1.0%, ROIC 42.7% vs 1.0% |
EMBC vs LFUS vs CTS vs UTMD — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
EMBC vs LFUS vs CTS vs UTMD — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
EMBC leads in 2 of 6 categories
UTMD leads 1 • LFUS leads 1 • CTS leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
UTMD leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LFUS is the larger business by revenue, generating $2.5B annually — 64.6x UTMD's $39M. UTMD is the more profitable business, keeping 29.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LFUS's -1.6%. On growth, LFUS holds the edge at +18.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.0B | $2.5B | $556M | $39M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $316M | $227M | $123M | $14M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $112M | -$40M | $69M | $11M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $174M | $390M | $88M | $14M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +61.4% | +38.3% | +38.7% | +52.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +27.7% | +2.8% | +15.9% | +29.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +10.7% | -1.6% | +12.4% | +29.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +16.7% | +15.7% | +15.8% | +37.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -14.4% | +18.5% | +10.9% | -1.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -2.9% | +69.1% | +34.1% | -7.0% |
Valuation Metrics
EMBC leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 2.2x trailing earnings, EMBC trades at a 92% valuation discount to CTS's 27.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), CTS offers better value at 1.75x vs UTMD's 5.48x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $214M | $11.1B | $1.7B | $210M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.4B | $11.5B | $1.8B | $124M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 2.22x | -152.27x | 27.33x | 18.79x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 1.28x | 33.79x | 24.63x | 10.41x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 1.75x | 5.48x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 3.73x | 83.21x | 14.68x | 8.64x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.20x | 4.66x | 3.16x | 5.44x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 4.53x | 3.23x | 1.78x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 1.17x | 30.35x | 19.82x | 14.63x |
Profitability & Efficiency
EMBC leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CTS delivers a 12.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $13 in annual profit, vs $-2 for LFUS. UTMD carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to LFUS's 0.39x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CTS scores 7/9 vs LFUS's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | -1.6% | +12.5% | +9.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +10.3% | -1.0% | +8.9% | +9.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +42.7% | +1.0% | +11.1% | +25.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +37.8% | +1.1% | +12.8% | +9.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.39x | 0.22x | 0.00x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.2B | $383M | $40M | -$86M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $226M | $563M | $82M | $86M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.4B | $946M | $122M | $225,000 |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 39.48x | -0.93x | 18.18x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LFUS leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CTS five years ago would be worth $18,321 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,245 for EMBC. Over the past 12 months, LFUS leads with a +132.6% total return vs EMBC's -66.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LFUS at 20.1% vs EMBC's -43.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -67.8% | +68.5% | +36.6% | +16.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -66.3% | +132.6% | +53.2% | +23.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -81.6% | +73.3% | +44.5% | -26.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -87.6% | +71.8% | +83.2% | -18.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -87.6% | +317.6% | +253.2% | +19.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -43.1% | +20.1% | +13.1% | -9.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CTS and UTMD each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
UTMD is the less volatile stock with a 0.55 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LFUS's 1.76 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CTS currently trades 98.4% 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 | 1.76x | 1.44x | 0.55x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $15.55 | $475.00 | $60.81 | $71.81 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $3.45 | $188.08 | $36.03 | $52.00 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +23.2% | +93.0% | +98.4% | +91.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 13.7 | 76.2 | 71.0 | 41.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.3M | 265K | 209K | 13K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — EMBC and LFUS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: EMBC as "Sell", LFUS as "Buy", CTS as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 233.3% upside for EMBC (target: $12) vs -9.4% for LFUS (target: $400). For income investors, EMBC offers the higher dividend yield at 16.50% vs CTS's 0.27%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Sell | Buy | Hold | — |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $12.00 | $400.00 | — | — |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 4 | 11 | 4 | — |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +16.5% | +0.7% | +0.3% | +1.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 16 | 1 | 3 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.59 | $2.89 | $0.16 | $1.23 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +2.7% | +0.2% | +3.3% | +4.0% |
EMBC leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). UTMD leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.
EMBC vs LFUS vs CTS vs UTMD: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is EMBC or LFUS or CTS or UTMD a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Littelfuse, Inc.
(LFUS) is the stronger pick with 8. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -5. 8% for Utah Medical Products, Inc. (UTMD). 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 Littelfuse, Inc. (LFUS) a "Buy" — based on 11 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 LFUS or CTS or UTMD?
On trailing P/E, Embecta Corp.
(EMBC) is the cheapest at 2. 2x versus CTS Corporation at 27. 3x. 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: CTS Corporation wins at 1. 58x versus Utah Medical Products, Inc. 's 3. 03x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — EMBC or LFUS or CTS or UTMD?
Over the past 5 years, CTS Corporation (CTS) delivered a total return of +83.
2%, compared to -87. 6% for Embecta Corp. (EMBC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LFUS returned +317. 6% 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 LFUS or CTS or UTMD?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Utah Medical Products, Inc.
(UTMD) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 55β versus Littelfuse, Inc. 's 1. 76β — meaning LFUS is approximately 218% more volatile than UTMD relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Utah Medical Products, Inc. (UTMD) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 39% for Littelfuse, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — EMBC or LFUS or CTS or UTMD?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Littelfuse, Inc.
(LFUS) is pulling ahead at 8. 9% versus -5. 8% for Utah Medical Products, Inc. (UTMD). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Embecta Corp. grew EPS 20. 9% year-over-year, compared to -172. 5% for Littelfuse, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, EMBC leads at -1. 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 LFUS or CTS or UTMD?
Utah Medical Products, Inc.
(UTMD) is the more profitable company, earning 29. 3% net margin versus -3. 0% for Littelfuse, Inc. — meaning it keeps 29. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: EMBC leads at 30. 5% versus 1. 6% for LFUS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — EMBC leads at 62. 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 EMBC or LFUS or CTS or UTMD 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, CTS Corporation (CTS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 58x versus Utah Medical Products, Inc. 's 3. 03x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Embecta Corp. (EMBC) trades at 1. 3x forward P/E versus 33. 8x for Littelfuse, Inc. — 32. 5x 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 LFUS or CTS or UTMD?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Embecta Corp. (EMBC) offers the highest yield at 16. 5%, versus 0. 3% for CTS Corporation (CTS).
09Is EMBC or LFUS or CTS or UTMD better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Utah Medical Products, Inc.
(UTMD) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 55), 1. 9% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (UTMD: +19. 1%, CTS: +253. 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 EMBC and LFUS and CTS and UTMD?
These companies operate in different sectors (EMBC (Healthcare) and LFUS (Technology) and CTS (Technology) and UTMD (Healthcare)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: EMBC is a small-cap deep-value stock; LFUS is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; CTS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; UTMD is a small-cap quality compounder stock. EMBC, LFUS, UTMD pay a dividend while CTS 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.