Medical - Devices
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
LIVN vs NVCR vs INVA vs MDT vs ABT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Instruments & Supplies
Biotechnology
Medical - Devices
Medical - Devices
LIVN vs NVCR vs INVA vs MDT vs ABT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Devices | Medical - Instruments & Supplies | Biotechnology | Medical - Devices | Medical - Devices |
| Market Cap | $3.88B | $1.92B | $1.93B | $99.94B | $151.30B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.43B | $674M | $424M | $35.48B | $43.84B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $107M | $-173M | $504M | $4.61B | $13.98B |
| Gross Margin | 67.5% | 75.2% | 76.2% | 61.9% | 54.0% |
| Operating Margin | 13.4% | -27.2% | 14.8% | 17.9% | 17.8% |
| Forward P/E | 16.8x | — | 11.9x | 14.1x | 15.9x |
| Total Debt | $473M | $290M | $269M | $28.52B | $15.28B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $636M | $103M | $551M | $2.22B | $7.62B |
LIVN vs NVCR vs INVA vs MDT vs ABT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| LivaNova PLC (LIVN) | 100 | 132.6 | +32.6% |
| NovoCure Limited (NVCR) | 100 | 25.0 | -75.0% |
| Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) | 100 | 163.2 | +63.2% |
| Medtronic plc (MDT) | 100 | 79.1 | -20.9% |
| Abbott Laboratories (ABT) | 100 | 91.7 | -8.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LIVN vs NVCR vs INVA vs MDT vs ABT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LIVN ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +63.0% vs ABT's -33.2%
NVCR lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
INVA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 18.5%, EPS growth 8.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 8.7%
- 94.9% 10Y total return vs ABT's 173.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.13, Low D/E 22.9%, current ratio 14.64x
- 18.5% revenue growth vs MDT's 3.6%
MDT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and defensive is your priority.
- Dividend streak 36 yrs, beta 0.47, yield 3.6%
- Beta 0.47, yield 3.6%, current ratio 1.85x
- 3.6% yield, 36-year raise streak, vs ABT's 2.5%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
- 175.8% ROA vs NVCR's -16.5%, ROIC 6.0% vs -16.4%
ABT is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.53 vs MDT's 36.00
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 18.5% revenue growth vs MDT's 3.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (11.9x vs 14.1x), PEG 1.15 vs 36.00 | |
| Quality / Margins | 118.9% margin vs NVCR's -25.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.13 vs NVCR's 2.20, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.6% yield, 36-year raise streak, vs ABT's 2.5%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +63.0% vs ABT's -33.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 175.8% ROA vs NVCR's -16.5%, ROIC 6.0% vs -16.4% |
LIVN vs NVCR vs INVA vs MDT vs ABT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
LIVN vs NVCR vs INVA vs MDT vs ABT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
INVA leads in 4 of 6 categories
MDT leads 1 • LIVN leads 0 • NVCR leads 0 • ABT leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
INVA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ABT is the larger business by revenue, generating $43.8B annually — 103.4x INVA's $424M. INVA is the more profitable business, keeping 118.9% 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 | $1.4B | $674M | $424M | $35.5B | $43.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $220M | -$165M | $86M | $9.4B | $10.9B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $107M | -$173M | $504M | $4.6B | $14.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $161M | -$48M | $181M | $5.4B | $6.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +67.5% | +75.2% | +76.2% | +61.9% | +54.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +13.4% | -27.2% | +14.8% | +17.9% | +17.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +7.5% | -25.7% | +118.9% | +13.0% | +31.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +11.2% | -7.1% | +42.8% | +15.2% | +15.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +14.3% | +12.3% | +10.6% | +8.8% | +6.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +106.7% | -100.0% | +4.0% | -11.9% | 0.0% |
Valuation Metrics
INVA leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 6.9x trailing earnings, INVA trades at a 68% valuation discount to MDT's 21.6x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ABT offers better value at 0.38x vs MDT's 36.00x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $3.9B | $1.9B | $1.9B | $99.9B | $151.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $3.7B | $2.1B | $1.7B | $126.2B | $159.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -15.94x | -13.80x | 6.91x | 21.60x | 11.39x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 16.84x | — | 11.91x | 14.13x | 15.87x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.67x | 36.00x | 0.38x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 15.40x | — | 8.10x | 14.32x | 15.83x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.79x | 2.92x | 4.55x | 2.98x | 3.61x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.22x | 5.51x | 1.65x | 2.08x | 3.18x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 22.40x | — | 9.88x | 19.28x | 23.82x |
Profitability & Efficiency
INVA leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
INVA delivers a 46.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $46 in annual profit, vs $-51 for NVCR. INVA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.23x 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 INVA's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +9.1% | -50.8% | +46.5% | +9.4% | +27.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +4.2% | -16.5% | +32.4% | +175.8% | +16.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +11.5% | -16.4% | +14.2% | +6.0% | +9.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +10.2% | -28.9% | +12.4% | +7.5% | +10.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.39x | 0.85x | 0.23x | 0.59x | 0.32x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$162M | $187M | -$282M | $26.3B | $7.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $636M | $103M | $551M | $2.2B | $7.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $473M | $290M | $269M | $28.5B | $15.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 3.98x | -96.80x | 63.45x | 9.08x | 19.22x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
INVA leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in INVA five years ago would be worth $19,437 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $875 for NVCR. Over the past 12 months, LIVN leads with a +63.0% total return vs ABT's -33.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors INVA at 25.0% vs NVCR's -37.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +17.0% | +28.3% | +14.7% | -18.1% | -28.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +63.0% | +1.1% | +21.7% | -2.8% | -33.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +50.5% | -75.7% | +95.2% | -4.2% | -15.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -14.5% | -91.3% | +94.4% | -27.7% | -17.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +46.2% | +30.3% | +94.9% | +26.5% | +173.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +14.6% | -37.6% | +25.0% | -1.4% | -5.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — LIVN and INVA each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
INVA is the less volatile stock with a 0.13 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 ABT's 62.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.29x | 2.20x | 0.13x | 0.47x | 0.25x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $71.92 | $20.06 | $25.15 | $106.33 | $139.06 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $39.36 | $9.82 | $16.52 | $77.16 | $86.15 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +98.6% | +83.9% | +90.7% | +73.3% | +62.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 57.6 | 69.8 | 39.9 | 27.3 | 22.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 808K | 1.5M | 621K | 7.8M | 10.5M |
Analyst Outlook
MDT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LIVN as "Buy", NVCR as "Buy", INVA as "Buy", MDT as "Buy", ABT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 99.0% upside for NVCR (target: $34) vs 7.0% for LIVN (target: $76). For income investors, MDT offers the higher dividend yield at 3.57% vs ABT's 2.52%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $75.88 | $33.50 | $37.67 | $109.50 | $128.71 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 14 | 15 | 10 | 49 | 41 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +3.6% | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 0 | 36 | 11 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $2.78 | $2.19 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.1% | 0.0% | +0.2% | +3.2% | +0.9% |
INVA leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). MDT leads in 1 (Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
LIVN vs NVCR vs INVA vs MDT vs ABT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LIVN or NVCR or INVA or MDT or ABT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the stronger pick with 18. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 6% for Medtronic plc (MDT). Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) offers the better valuation at 6. 9x trailing P/E (11. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate LivaNova PLC (LIVN) 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 — LIVN or NVCR or INVA or MDT or ABT?
On trailing P/E, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the cheapest at 6. 9x versus Medtronic plc at 21. 6x. On forward P/E, Innoviva, Inc. is actually cheaper at 11. 9x. 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 Medtronic plc's 36. 00x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LIVN or NVCR or INVA or MDT or ABT?
Over the past 5 years, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) delivered a total return of +94. 4%, compared to -91. 3% for NovoCure Limited (NVCR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ABT returned +173. 7% versus MDT's +26. 5%. 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 — LIVN or NVCR or INVA or MDT or ABT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 13β versus NovoCure Limited's 2. 20β — meaning NVCR is approximately 1648% more volatile than INVA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 23% versus 85% for NovoCure Limited — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LIVN or NVCR or INVA or MDT or ABT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is pulling ahead at 18. 5% versus 3. 6% for Medtronic plc (MDT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Innoviva, Inc. grew EPS 816. 7% year-over-year, compared to -483. 6% for LivaNova PLC. Over a 3-year CAGR, LIVN leads at 10. 8% 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 — LIVN or NVCR or INVA or MDT or ABT?
Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the more profitable company, earning 63. 8% net margin versus -20. 8% for NovoCure Limited — meaning it keeps 63. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: INVA leads at 38. 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 LIVN or NVCR or INVA or MDT 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 Medtronic plc's 36. 00x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) trades at 11. 9x forward P/E versus 16. 8x for LivaNova PLC — 4. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for NVCR: 99. 0% to $33. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — LIVN or NVCR or INVA or MDT or ABT?
In this comparison, MDT (3.
6% yield), ABT (2. 5% yield) pay a dividend. LIVN, NVCR, INVA do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is LIVN or NVCR or INVA or MDT 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 LIVN and NVCR and INVA and MDT 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: LIVN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NVCR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; INVA is a small-cap high-growth stock; MDT is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; ABT is a mid-cap deep-value stock. MDT, ABT pay a dividend while LIVN, NVCR, INVA 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.