NAOV vs NSPR

For growth investors, InspireMD, Inc.

(NSPR) is the stronger pick with 28. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 12. 0% for NanoVibronix, Inc. (NAOV). 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, InspireMD, Inc.

(NSPR) delivered a total return of -77. 0%, compared to -99. 9% for NanoVibronix, Inc. (NAOV). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NAOV returned -100. 0% versus NSPR'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.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), InspireMD, Inc.

(NSPR) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 85β versus NanoVibronix, Inc. 's 1. 49β — meaning NAOV is approximately 75% more volatile than NSPR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, InspireMD, Inc. (NSPR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 4% versus 19% for NanoVibronix, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), InspireMD, Inc.

(NSPR) is pulling ahead at 28. 1% versus 12. 0% for NanoVibronix, Inc. (NAOV). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: NanoVibronix, Inc. grew EPS 35. 2% year-over-year, compared to 0. 0% for InspireMD, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, NSPR leads at 20. 2% 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.

NanoVibronix, Inc.

(NAOV) is the more profitable company, earning -144. 8% net margin versus -543. 3% for InspireMD, Inc. — meaning it keeps -144. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NAOV leads at -140. 0% versus -547. 0% for NSPR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NAOV leads at 59. 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.

None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.

All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, InspireMD, Inc.

(NSPR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 85)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (NSPR: -100. 0%, NAOV: -100. 0%), 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: NAOV is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NSPR is a small-cap high-growth stock. 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.