ICUI vs AVA

For growth investors, Avista Corporation (AVA) is the stronger pick with 1.

3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -6. 4% for ICU Medical, Inc. (ICUI). Avista Corporation (AVA) offers the better valuation at 17. 2x trailing P/E (16. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate ICU Medical, Inc. (ICUI) 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.

On trailing P/E, Avista Corporation (AVA) is the cheapest at 17.

2x versus ICU Medical, Inc. at 4186. 1x. On forward P/E, ICU Medical, Inc. is actually cheaper at 15. 2x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Avista Corporation (AVA) delivered a total return of +6.

9%, compared to -38. 4% for ICU Medical, Inc. (ICUI). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AVA returned +40. 1% versus ICUI's +19. 0%. 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), Avista Corporation (AVA) is the lower-risk stock at -0.

00β versus ICU Medical, Inc. 's 1. 23β — meaning ICUI is approximately -41100% more volatile than AVA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, ICU Medical, Inc. (ICUI) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 66% versus 125% for Avista Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Avista Corporation (AVA) is pulling ahead at 1.

3% versus -6. 4% for ICU Medical, Inc. (ICUI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: ICU Medical, Inc. grew EPS 100. 6% year-over-year, compared to 4. 4% for Avista Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, AVA leads at 4. 7% 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.

Avista Corporation (AVA) is the more profitable company, earning 9.

8% net margin versus 0. 0% for ICU Medical, Inc. — meaning it keeps 9. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: AVA leads at 18. 0% versus 4. 8% for ICUI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ICUI leads at 36. 8%, 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.

On forward earnings alone, ICU Medical, Inc.

(ICUI) trades at 15. 2x forward P/E versus 16. 0x for Avista Corporation — 0. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ICUI: 32. 9% to $163. 50.

In this comparison, AVA (4.

8% yield) pays a dividend. ICUI does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Avista Corporation (AVA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.

00), 4. 8% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (AVA: +40. 1%, ICUI: +19. 0%), 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.

These companies operate in different sectors (ICUI (Healthcare) and AVA (Utilities)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: ICUI is a small-cap quality compounder stock; AVA is a small-cap deep-value stock. AVA pays a dividend while ICUI 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.