Medical - Devices
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
NAOV vs ARAY vs NVCR vs ABT vs MDT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Devices
Medical - Instruments & Supplies
Medical - Devices
Medical - Devices
NAOV vs ARAY vs NVCR vs ABT vs MDT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Devices | Medical - Devices | Medical - Instruments & Supplies | Medical - Devices | Medical - Devices |
| Market Cap | $513K | $35M | $1.92B | $151.30B | $99.94B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $3M | $429M | $674M | $43.84B | $35.48B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-4M | $-46M | $-173M | $13.98B | $4.61B |
| Gross Margin | 30.0% | 26.8% | 75.2% | 54.0% | 61.9% |
| Operating Margin | -351.8% | -5.1% | -27.2% | 17.8% | 17.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | — | 15.9x | 14.1x |
| Total Debt | $116K | $176M | $290M | $15.28B | $28.52B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $752K | $57M | $103M | $7.62B | $2.22B |
NAOV vs ARAY vs NVCR vs ABT vs MDT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | Mar 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| NanoVibronix, Inc. (NAOV) | 100 | 0.0 | -100.0% |
| Accuray Incorporated (ARAY) | 100 | 38.6 | -61.4% |
| NovoCure Limited (NVCR) | 100 | 18.4 | -81.6% |
| Abbott Laboratories (ABT) | 100 | 115.1 | +15.1% |
| Medtronic plc (MDT) | 100 | 104.4 | +4.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NAOV vs ARAY vs NVCR vs ABT vs MDT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NAOV ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 12.0%, EPS growth 35.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 14.7%
- 12.0% revenue growth vs ARAY's 2.7%
Among these 5 stocks, ARAY doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
NVCR is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +1.1% vs NAOV's -95.7%
ABT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- 173.7% 10Y total return vs NVCR's 30.3%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.25, Low D/E 31.9%, current ratio 1.67x
- PEG 0.53 vs MDT's 36.00
- 31.9% margin vs NAOV's -133.0%
MDT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 36 yrs, beta 0.47, yield 3.6%
- Beta 0.47, yield 3.6%, current ratio 1.85x
- Better valuation composite
- 3.6% yield, 36-year raise streak, vs ABT's 2.5%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 12.0% revenue growth vs ARAY's 2.7% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 31.9% margin vs NAOV's -133.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.25 vs ARAY's 2.42, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.6% yield, 36-year raise streak, vs ABT's 2.5%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +1.1% vs NAOV's -95.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 175.8% ROA vs NVCR's -16.5%, ROIC 6.0% vs -16.4% |
NAOV vs ARAY vs NVCR vs ABT vs MDT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
NAOV vs ARAY vs NVCR vs ABT vs MDT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ARAY leads in 1 of 6 categories
ABT leads 1 • MDT leads 1 • NAOV leads 0 • NVCR leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — NAOV and ABT each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ABT is the larger business by revenue, generating $43.8B annually — 16328.9x NAOV's $3M. ABT is the more profitable business, keeping 31.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NAOV's -133.0%. On growth, NAOV holds the edge at +92.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $3M | $429M | $674M | $43.8B | $35.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$9M | -$15M | -$165M | $10.9B | $9.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$4M | -$46M | -$173M | $14.0B | $4.6B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$7M | -$28M | -$48M | $6.9B | $5.4B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +30.0% | +26.8% | +75.2% | +54.0% | +61.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -3.5% | -5.1% | -27.2% | +17.8% | +17.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -133.0% | -10.8% | -25.7% | +31.9% | +13.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -2.7% | -6.5% | -7.1% | +15.8% | +15.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +92.0% | -7.4% | +12.3% | +6.9% | +8.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +129.2% | -6.1% | -100.0% | 0.0% | -11.9% |
Valuation Metrics
ARAY leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 11.4x trailing earnings, ABT trades at a 47% 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 | $512,711 | $35M | $1.9B | $151.3B | $99.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | -$123,289 | $154M | $2.1B | $159.0B | $126.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.14x | -18.91x | -13.80x | 11.39x | 21.60x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | 15.87x | 14.13x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 0.38x | 36.00x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 10.99x | — | 15.83x | 14.32x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.20x | 0.08x | 2.92x | 3.61x | 2.98x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.82x | 0.37x | 5.51x | 3.18x | 2.08x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 23.82x | 19.28x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ABT leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ABT delivers a 27.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $27 in annual profit, vs $-77 for ARAY. NAOV carries lower financial leverage with a 0.19x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to ARAY's 2.17x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ABT scores 7/9 vs NAOV's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -8.4% | -77.5% | -50.8% | +27.3% | +9.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -6.6% | -10.1% | -16.5% | +16.6% | +175.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -7.7% | +3.0% | -16.4% | +9.9% | +6.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -139.7% | +2.8% | -28.9% | +10.8% | +7.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.19x | 2.17x | 0.85x | 0.32x | 0.59x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$636,000 | $119M | $187M | $7.7B | $26.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $752,000 | $57M | $103M | $7.6B | $2.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $116,000 | $176M | $290M | $15.3B | $28.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -23.76x | -1.86x | -96.80x | 19.22x | 9.08x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — NVCR and ABT and MDT each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ABT five years ago would be worth $8,209 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $9 for NAOV. Over the past 12 months, NVCR leads with a +1.1% total return vs NAOV's -95.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MDT at -1.4% vs NAOV's -83.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -22.4% | -65.5% | +28.3% | -28.9% | -18.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -95.7% | -78.4% | +1.1% | -33.2% | -2.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.5% | -91.8% | -75.7% | -15.4% | -4.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.9% | -93.9% | -91.3% | -17.9% | -27.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -94.5% | +30.3% | +173.7% | +26.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -83.3% | -56.6% | -37.6% | -5.4% | -1.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — NVCR and ABT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ABT is the less volatile stock with a 0.25 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ARAY's 2.42 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. NVCR currently trades 83.9% from its 52-week high vs NAOV's 4.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.49x | 2.42x | 2.20x | 0.25x | 0.47x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $44.50 | $2.10 | $20.06 | $139.06 | $106.33 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.99 | $0.28 | $9.82 | $86.15 | $77.16 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +4.3% | +14.0% | +83.9% | +62.6% | +73.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 45.1 | 58.4 | 69.8 | 22.9 | 27.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 335K | 1.4M | 1.5M | 10.5M | 7.8M |
Analyst Outlook
MDT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NVCR as "Buy", ABT as "Buy", MDT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 99.0% upside for NVCR (target: $34) vs 40.5% for MDT (target: $110). 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 |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — | $33.50 | $128.71 | $109.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | — | 15 | 41 | 49 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +2.5% | +3.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | 11 | 36 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $2.19 | $2.78 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.9% | +3.2% |
ARAY leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). ABT leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
NAOV vs ARAY vs NVCR vs ABT vs MDT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NAOV or ARAY or NVCR or ABT or MDT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, NanoVibronix, Inc.
(NAOV) is the stronger pick with 12. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 2. 7% for Accuray Incorporated (ARAY). 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 NovoCure Limited (NVCR) a "Buy" — based on 15 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 — NAOV or ARAY or NVCR or ABT or MDT?
On trailing P/E, Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the cheapest at 11.
4x versus Medtronic plc at 21. 6x. On forward P/E, Medtronic plc is actually cheaper at 14. 1x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. 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 — NAOV or ARAY or NVCR or ABT or MDT?
Over the past 5 years, Abbott Laboratories (ABT) delivered a total return of -17.
9%, compared to -99. 9% for NanoVibronix, Inc. (NAOV). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ABT returned +173. 7% versus NAOV's -100. 0%. 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 — NAOV or ARAY or NVCR or ABT or MDT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
25β versus Accuray Incorporated's 2. 42β — meaning ARAY is approximately 875% more volatile than ABT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, NanoVibronix, Inc. (NAOV) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 19% versus 2% for Accuray Incorporated — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NAOV or ARAY or NVCR or ABT or MDT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), NanoVibronix, Inc.
(NAOV) is pulling ahead at 12. 0% versus 2. 7% for Accuray Incorporated (ARAY). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Abbott Laboratories grew EPS 133. 6% year-over-year, compared to 21. 8% for NovoCure Limited. Over a 3-year CAGR, NAOV leads at 14. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — NAOV or ARAY or NVCR or ABT or MDT?
Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the more profitable company, earning 31.
9% net margin versus -144. 8% for NanoVibronix, Inc. — meaning it keeps 31. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MDT leads at 17. 8% versus -140. 0% for NAOV. 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 NAOV or ARAY or NVCR or ABT or MDT 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, Medtronic plc (MDT) trades at 14. 1x forward P/E versus 15. 9x for Abbott Laboratories — 1. 7x 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 — NAOV or ARAY or NVCR or ABT or MDT?
In this comparison, MDT (3.
6% yield), ABT (2. 5% yield) pay a dividend. NAOV, ARAY, NVCR do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is NAOV or ARAY or NVCR or ABT or MDT 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). Accuray Incorporated (ARAY) carries a higher beta of 2. 42 — 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%, ARAY: -94. 5%), 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 NAOV and ARAY and NVCR and ABT and MDT?
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: NAOV is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ARAY is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NVCR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ABT is a mid-cap deep-value stock; MDT is a mid-cap income-oriented stock. ABT, MDT pay a dividend while NAOV, ARAY, NVCR 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.