Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
LNAI vs CDNA vs PACB vs ILMN vs TMO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Devices
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
LNAI vs CDNA vs PACB vs ILMN vs TMO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Devices | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| Market Cap | $7M | $1.11B | $387M | $22.13B | $170.69B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $413M | $160M | $4.39B | $45.20B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-126M | $-8M | $-129M | $853M | $6.86B |
| Gross Margin | — | 48.2% | 37.1% | 67.1% | 39.4% |
| Operating Margin | — | -3.3% | -101.7% | 20.9% | 17.8% |
| Forward P/E | — | 22.8x | — | 28.0x | 18.5x |
| Total Debt | $10M | $20M | $759M | $2.55B | $40.85B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $93K | $65M | $64M | $1.42B | $9.86B |
LNAI vs CDNA vs PACB vs ILMN vs TMO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| CareDx, Inc (CDNA) | 100 | 66.6 | -33.4% |
| Pacific Biosciences… (PACB) | 100 | 36.4 | -63.6% |
| Illumina, Inc. (ILMN) | 100 | 41.3 | -58.7% |
| Thermo Fisher Scien… (TMO) | 100 | 131.5 | +31.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LNAI vs CDNA vs PACB vs ILMN vs TMO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LNAI is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and defensive is your priority.
- beta 0.71
- Beta 0.71, current ratio 0.04x
- 21.7% revenue growth vs ILMN's -0.8%
- Beta 0.71 vs PACB's 2.41
CDNA lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Among these 5 stocks, PACB doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
ILMN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 6.61 vs TMO's 8.75
- Better valuation composite
- 19.4% margin vs PACB's -80.3%
- +78.6% vs LNAI's -86.6%
TMO ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 3.9%, EPS growth 7.3%, 3Y rev CAGR -0.3%
- 215.6% 10Y total return vs CDNA's 405.9%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.07, Low D/E 76.3%, current ratio 1.89x
- 0.4% yield; 8-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 21.7% revenue growth vs ILMN's -0.8% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 19.4% margin vs PACB's -80.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.71 vs PACB's 2.41 | |
| Dividends | 0.4% yield; 8-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +78.6% vs LNAI's -86.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.4% ROA vs LNAI's -18.8%, ROIC 16.8% vs -22.4% |
LNAI vs CDNA vs PACB vs ILMN vs TMO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
LNAI vs CDNA vs PACB vs ILMN vs TMO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ILMN leads in 2 of 6 categories
TMO leads 1 • CDNA leads 1 • LNAI leads 0 • PACB leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ILMN leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TMO and LNAI operate at a comparable scale, with $45.2B and $0 in trailing revenue. ILMN is the more profitable business, keeping 19.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PACB's -80.3%. On growth, CDNA holds the edge at +39.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $413M | $160M | $4.4B | $45.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$12M | $2M | -$151M | $1.1B | $10.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$126M | -$8M | -$129M | $853M | $6.9B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$6M | $65M | -$116M | $989M | $6.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +48.2% | +37.1% | +67.1% | +39.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | -3.3% | -101.7% | +20.9% | +17.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | -2.0% | -80.3% | +19.4% | +15.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +15.8% | -72.6% | +22.5% | +14.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +39.0% | +0.1% | +4.8% | +6.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +80.8% | +126.3% | +97.9% | +6.1% | +11.3% |
Valuation Metrics
TMO leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 25.9x trailing earnings, TMO trades at a 3% valuation discount to ILMN's 26.7x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ILMN offers better value at 6.32x vs TMO's 12.26x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $7M | $1.1B | $387M | $22.1B | $170.7B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $17M | $1.1B | $1.1B | $23.3B | $201.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.03x | -53.50x | -0.70x | 26.73x | 25.89x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 22.81x | — | 27.96x | 18.48x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 6.32x | 12.26x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | 20.52x | 18.52x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 2.91x | 2.42x | 5.10x | 3.83x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 3.76x | 71.78x | 8.35x | 3.23x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 30.61x | — | 23.77x | 27.12x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ILMN leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ILMN delivers a 32.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $33 in annual profit, vs $-3 for LNAI. CDNA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.06x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PACB's 141.98x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ILMN scores 8/9 vs LNAI's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -3.2% | -2.6% | -2.5% | +32.8% | +13.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -18.8% | -1.9% | -16.1% | +13.4% | +6.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -22.4% | -5.7% | -45.8% | +16.8% | +7.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -33.2% | -5.8% | -58.0% | +17.6% | +9.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 5 | 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.06x | 141.98x | 0.94x | 0.76x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $10M | -$46M | $696M | $1.1B | $31.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $92,700 | $65M | $64M | $1.4B | $9.9B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $10M | $20M | $759M | $2.6B | $40.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -11.70x | — | -44.67x | 12.09x | 5.89x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CDNA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in TMO five years ago would be worth $10,256 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $558 for PACB. Over the past 12 months, ILMN leads with a +78.6% total return vs LNAI's -86.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CDNA at 38.5% vs PACB's -52.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -68.5% | +11.8% | -30.4% | +8.4% | -22.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -86.6% | +30.8% | +16.4% | +78.6% | +6.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -86.6% | +165.8% | -89.5% | -28.1% | -11.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -86.6% | -66.0% | -94.4% | -59.8% | +2.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -86.6% | +405.9% | -85.4% | +9.5% | +215.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -48.8% | +38.5% | -52.8% | -10.4% | -4.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — LNAI and ILMN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
LNAI is the less volatile stock with a 0.71 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than PACB's 2.41 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ILMN currently trades 93.7% from its 52-week high vs LNAI's 12.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.71x | 1.36x | 2.41x | 1.20x | 1.07x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $2.45 | $23.24 | $2.73 | $155.53 | $643.99 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.15 | $10.96 | $0.85 | $77.50 | $385.46 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +12.5% | +92.1% | +46.9% | +93.7% | +71.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 44.9 | 58.8 | 39.8 | 63.0 | 35.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 25.9M | 647K | 5.9M | 1.5M | 2.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CDNA as "Buy", PACB as "Buy", ILMN as "Buy", TMO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 42.5% upside for TMO (target: $655) vs -21.9% for PACB (target: $1). TMO is the only dividend payer here at 0.37% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $24.00 | $1.00 | $147.38 | $654.67 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 13 | 18 | 50 | 42 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | +0.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | — | 8 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | $1.69 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +7.9% | 0.0% | +3.4% | +1.8% |
ILMN leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). TMO leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
LNAI vs CDNA vs PACB vs ILMN vs TMO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LNAI or CDNA or PACB or ILMN or TMO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, CareDx, Inc (CDNA) is the stronger pick with 13.
8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -0. 8% for Illumina, Inc. (ILMN). Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. (TMO) offers the better valuation at 25. 9x trailing P/E (18. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate CareDx, Inc (CDNA) a "Buy" — based on 13 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 — LNAI or CDNA or PACB or ILMN or TMO?
On trailing P/E, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.
(TMO) is the cheapest at 25. 9x versus Illumina, Inc. at 26. 7x. On forward P/E, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. is actually cheaper at 18. 5x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Illumina, Inc. wins at 6. 61x versus Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. 's 8. 75x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LNAI or CDNA or PACB or ILMN or TMO?
Over the past 5 years, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.
(TMO) delivered a total return of +2. 6%, compared to -94. 4% for Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc. (PACB). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CDNA returned +405. 9% versus LNAI's -86. 6%. 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 — LNAI or CDNA or PACB or ILMN or TMO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Lunai Bioworks Inc.
(LNAI) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 71β versus Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc. 's 2. 41β — meaning PACB is approximately 238% more volatile than LNAI relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, CareDx, Inc (CDNA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 6% versus 142% for Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LNAI or CDNA or PACB or ILMN or TMO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), CareDx, Inc (CDNA) is pulling ahead at 13.
8% versus -0. 8% for Illumina, Inc. (ILMN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Illumina, Inc. grew EPS 170. 9% year-over-year, compared to -143. 0% for CareDx, Inc. Over a 3-year CAGR, PACB leads at 7. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — LNAI or CDNA or PACB or ILMN or TMO?
Illumina, Inc.
(ILMN) is the more profitable company, earning 19. 6% net margin versus -341. 5% for Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc. — meaning it keeps 19. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ILMN leads at 19. 9% versus -348. 5% for PACB. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CDNA leads at 67. 0%, 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 LNAI or CDNA or PACB or ILMN or TMO 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, Illumina, Inc. (ILMN) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 6. 61x versus Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. 's 8. 75x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. (TMO) trades at 18. 5x forward P/E versus 28. 0x for Illumina, Inc. — 9. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for TMO: 42. 5% to $654. 67.
08Which pays a better dividend — LNAI or CDNA or PACB or ILMN or TMO?
In this comparison, TMO (0.
4% yield) pays a dividend. LNAI, CDNA, PACB, ILMN do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is LNAI or CDNA or PACB or ILMN or TMO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Lunai Bioworks Inc.
(LNAI) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 71)). Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc. (PACB) carries a higher beta of 2. 41 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (LNAI: -86. 6%, PACB: -85. 4%), 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 LNAI and CDNA and PACB and ILMN and TMO?
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.
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.