FLGT vs TMO

For growth investors, Fulgent Genetics, Inc.

(FLGT) is the stronger pick with 13. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 9% for Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. (TMO). Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. (TMO) offers the better valuation at 26. 8x trailing P/E (19. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Fulgent Genetics, Inc. (FLGT) a "Buy" — based on 9 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, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.

(TMO) delivered a total return of +2. 8%, compared to -79. 8% for Fulgent Genetics, Inc. (FLGT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: TMO returned +229. 1% versus FLGT's +64. 6%. 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), Fulgent Genetics, Inc.

(FLGT) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 97β versus Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. 's 1. 10β — meaning TMO is approximately 12% more volatile than FLGT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Fulgent Genetics, Inc. (FLGT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 76% for Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Fulgent Genetics, Inc.

(FLGT) is pulling ahead at 13. 8% versus 3. 9% for Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. (TMO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. grew EPS 7. 3% year-over-year, compared to -39. 7% for Fulgent Genetics, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, TMO leads at -0. 3% 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.

Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.

(TMO) is the more profitable company, earning 15. 1% net margin versus -18. 8% for Fulgent Genetics, Inc. — meaning it keeps 15. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TMO leads at 18. 2% versus -28. 2% for FLGT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FLGT leads at 40. 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.

Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FLGT: 138.

3% to $36. 00.

In this comparison, TMO (0.

4% yield) pays a dividend. FLGT does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.

(TMO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 10), +229. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (TMO: +229. 1%, FLGT: +64. 6%), 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.

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.