LMAT vs CNMD

For growth investors, LeMaitre Vascular, Inc.

(LMAT) is the stronger pick with 13. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 2% for CONMED Corporation (CNMD). CONMED Corporation (CNMD) offers the better valuation at 25. 2x trailing P/E (8. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate LeMaitre Vascular, Inc. (LMAT) a "Buy" — based on 20 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, CONMED Corporation (CNMD) is the cheapest at 25.

2x versus LeMaitre Vascular, Inc. at 42. 8x. On forward P/E, CONMED Corporation is actually cheaper at 8. 7x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: CONMED Corporation wins at 0. 24x versus LeMaitre Vascular, Inc. 's 1. 92x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, LeMaitre Vascular, Inc.

(LMAT) delivered a total return of +118. 2%, compared to -71. 0% for CONMED Corporation (CNMD). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LMAT returned +608. 6% versus CNMD's +6. 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), LeMaitre Vascular, Inc.

(LMAT) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 57β versus CONMED Corporation's 1. 34β — meaning CNMD is approximately 133% more volatile than LMAT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, LeMaitre Vascular, Inc. (LMAT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 47% versus 81% for CONMED Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), LeMaitre Vascular, Inc.

(LMAT) is pulling ahead at 13. 5% versus 5. 2% for CONMED Corporation (CNMD). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: LeMaitre Vascular, Inc. grew EPS 30. 6% year-over-year, compared to -64. 6% for CONMED Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, LMAT leads at 15. 6% 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.

LeMaitre Vascular, Inc.

(LMAT) is the more profitable company, earning 23. 1% net margin versus 3. 4% for CONMED Corporation — meaning it keeps 23. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LMAT leads at 27. 2% versus 10. 3% for CNMD. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — LMAT leads at 71. 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.

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, CONMED Corporation (CNMD) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 24x versus LeMaitre Vascular, Inc. 's 1. 92x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, CONMED Corporation (CNMD) trades at 8. 7x forward P/E versus 37. 2x for LeMaitre Vascular, Inc. — 28. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CNMD: 104. 8% to $78. 00.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

CONMED Corporation (CNMD) offers the highest yield at 2. 1%, versus 0. 7% for LeMaitre Vascular, Inc. (LMAT).

For long-horizon retirement investors, LeMaitre Vascular, Inc.

(LMAT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 57), 0. 7% yield, +608. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (LMAT: +608. 6%, CNMD: +6. 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.