MDWD vs ABT

For growth investors, Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the stronger pick with 4.

6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -16. 1% for MediWound Ltd. (MDWD). Abbott Laboratories (ABT) offers the better valuation at 11. 4x trailing P/E (15. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate MediWound Ltd. (MDWD) 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.

Over the past 5 years, Abbott Laboratories (ABT) delivered a total return of -17.

9%, compared to -44. 8% for MediWound Ltd. (MDWD). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ABT returned +173. 7% versus MDWD's -68. 4%. 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), Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

25β versus MediWound Ltd. 's 1. 13β — meaning MDWD is approximately 356% more volatile than ABT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, MediWound Ltd. (MDWD) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 20% versus 32% for Abbott Laboratories — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is pulling ahead at 4.

6% versus -16. 1% for MediWound Ltd. (MDWD). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Abbott Laboratories grew EPS 133. 6% year-over-year, compared to 30. 7% for MediWound Ltd.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ABT leads at -0. 9% 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.

Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the more profitable company, earning 31.

9% net margin versus -140. 8% for MediWound Ltd. — meaning it keeps 31. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ABT leads at 16. 3% versus -149. 1% for MDWD. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ABT leads at 50. 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.

Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MDWD: 108.

5% to $36. 00.

In this comparison, ABT (2.

5% yield) pays a dividend. MDWD does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

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). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ABT: +173. 7%, MDWD: -68. 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.

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: MDWD is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ABT is a mid-cap deep-value stock. ABT pays a dividend while MDWD 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.