FMS
Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA
Medical - Care Facilities
Market Cap$11.92B
5Y Perf.+13.4%
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Try these comparisons:
Stock Comparison
FMS vs NVA
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
NVA
Nova Minerals Limited
Other Precious Metals
Market Cap$31M
5Y Perf.—
FMS vs NVA — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | FMS | NVA |
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Care Facilities | Other Precious Metals |
| Market Cap | $11.92B | $31M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $19.36B | — |
| Net Income (TTM) | $947M | $-10M |
| Gross Margin | 26.0% | — |
| Operating Margin | 9.7% | — |
| Forward P/E | 10.5x | — |
| Total Debt | $10.79B | $0.00 |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1.60B | $9M |
FMS vs NVA — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
FMS
NVA
| Stock | Jun 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fresenius Medical C… (FMS) | 100 | 113.4 | +13.4% |
| Nova Minerals Limit… (NVA) | 100 | Infinity | +Infinity% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FMS vs NVA
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Bottom line: FMS leads in 4 of 5 categories, making it the strongest pick for profitability and margin quality and capital preservation and lower volatility. Nova Minerals Limited is the stronger pick specifically for recent price momentum and sentiment. This set spans 2 sectors — these stocks serve different portfolio roles, not just different price points.
FMS
Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA
The Income Pick
FMS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 4 yrs, beta 0.49, yield 3.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.49, Low D/E 75.6%, current ratio 1.26x
- Beta 0.49, yield 3.8%, current ratio 1.26x
Best for: income & stability and sleep-well-at-night
NVA
Nova Minerals Limited
The Long-Run Compounder
NVA is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 60.2% 10Y total return vs FMS's -35.1%
- +150.6% vs FMS's -20.5%
Best for: long-term compounding
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Quality / Margins | FMS | 4.9% margin vs NVA's -0.4% |
| Stability / Safety | FMS | Beta 0.49 vs NVA's 1.73 |
| Dividends | FMS | 3.8% yield; 4-year raise streak; the other pay no meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | NVA | +150.6% vs FMS's -20.5% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | FMS | 3.0% ROA vs NVA's -8.7% |
FMS vs NVA — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
FY 2025
Segment breakdown not available.
FMS vs NVA — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
BEST OVERALLFMSLAGGINGNVA
NVANova Minerals Limited
2leads
FMSFresenius Medical Car…
2leads
6 Total Categories
CATEGORYLEADERvs NVAMETRICS WON
Income & Cash FlowRevenue, margins, and cash flow strength
—
—
Valuation MetricsMultiples, price ratios, and targets
NVA2/2
Profitability & EfficiencyROE, ROIC, leverage, and quality scores
FMS5/7
Total Returns1Y, 3Y, 5Y total returns with dividends
NVA3/3
Risk & VolatilityBeta, volatility, and downside exposure
FMS2/2
Analyst OutlookRatings, price targets, and dividends
—
—
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
| Metric | FMSFresenius Medical… | NVANova Minerals Lim… |
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $19.4B | — |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $3.5B | — |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $947M | — |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $1.8B | — |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +26.0% | — |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +9.7% | — |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +4.9% | — |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +9.1% | — |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -5.5% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -15.4% | — |
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Valuation Metrics
NVA leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | FMSFresenius Medical… | NVANova Minerals Lim… |
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $11.9B | $31M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $22.7B | $24M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 10.96x | -3.86x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 10.52x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 2.15x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 5.91x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.52x | — |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.75x | 0.39x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 5.98x | — |
NVA leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
FMS leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
FMS delivers a 6.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $7 in annual profit, vs $-9 for NVA. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FMS scores 7/9 vs NVA's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | FMSFresenius Medical… | NVANova Minerals Lim… |
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +6.7% | -8.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.0% | -8.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +5.6% | — |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +6.9% | -5.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 3 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.76x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $9.2B | -$9M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1.6B | $9M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $10.8B | $0 |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 10.17x | -9.50x |
FMS leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NVA leads this category, winning 3 of 3 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Over the past 12 months, NVA leads with a +150.6% total return vs FMS's -20.5%.
| Metric | FMSFresenius Medical… | NVANova Minerals Lim… |
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -7.9% | +0.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -20.5% | +150.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +2.2% | — |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -35.9% | — |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -35.1% | +60.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +0.7% | — |
NVA leads this category, winning 3 of 3 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FMS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FMS is the less volatile stock with a 0.49 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NVA's 1.73 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FMS currently trades 71.1% from its 52-week high vs NVA's 39.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | FMSFresenius Medical… | NVANova Minerals Lim… |
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.49x | 1.73x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $30.46 | $16.28 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $20.02 | $1.68 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +71.1% | +39.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 36.5 | 56.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 527K | 480K |
FMS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
FMS is the only dividend payer here at 3.78% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | FMSFresenius Medical… | NVANova Minerals Lim… |
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | — |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $28.00 | — |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 18 | — |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.8% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 4 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.70 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +5.5% | 0.0% |
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Key Takeaway
NVA leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns). FMS leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Risk & Volatility).
Best OverallFresenius Medical Care AG &… (FMS)Leads 2 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...
FMS vs NVA: Frequently Asked Questions
7 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FMS or NVA a better buy right now?
Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co.
KGaA (FMS) offers the better valuation at 11. 0x trailing P/E (10. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA (FMS) a "Hold" — based on 18 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 is the better long-term investment — FMS or NVA?
Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NVA returned +60.
2% versus FMS's -35. 1%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — FMS or NVA?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co.
KGaA (FMS) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 49β versus Nova Minerals Limited's 1. 73β — meaning NVA is approximately 252% more volatile than FMS relative to the S&P 500.
04Which has better profit margins — FMS or NVA?
Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co.
KGaA (FMS) is the more profitable company, earning 5. 0% net margin versus 0. 0% for Nova Minerals Limited — meaning it keeps 5. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FMS leads at 9. 3% versus 0. 0% for NVA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FMS leads at 25. 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.
05Which pays a better dividend — FMS or NVA?
In this comparison, FMS (3.
8% yield) pays a dividend. NVA does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
06Is FMS or NVA better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co.
KGaA (FMS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 49), 3. 8% yield). Nova Minerals Limited (NVA) carries a higher beta of 1. 73 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (FMS: -35. 1%, NVA: +60. 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.
07What are the main differences between FMS and NVA?
These companies operate in different sectors (FMS (Healthcare) and NVA (Basic Materials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: FMS is a mid-cap deep-value stock; NVA is a small-cap quality compounder stock. FMS pays a dividend while NVA 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 both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.