NEO vs LH

For growth investors, NeoGenomics, Inc.

(NEO) is the stronger pick with 10. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 7. 2% for Labcorp Holdings Inc. (LH). Labcorp Holdings Inc. (LH) offers the better valuation at 25. 4x trailing P/E (14. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate NeoGenomics, Inc. (NEO) a "Buy" — based on 29 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 forward P/E, Labcorp Holdings Inc.

is actually cheaper at 14. 8x.

Over the past 5 years, Labcorp Holdings Inc.

(LH) delivered a total return of +24. 5%, compared to -74. 4% for NeoGenomics, Inc. (NEO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LH returned +153. 6% versus NEO's +42. 1%. 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), Labcorp Holdings Inc.

(LH) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 34β versus NeoGenomics, Inc. 's 1. 37β — meaning NEO is approximately 302% more volatile than LH relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, NeoGenomics, Inc. (NEO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 56% versus 83% for Labcorp Holdings Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

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

(NEO) is pulling ahead at 10. 1% versus 7. 2% for Labcorp Holdings Inc. (LH). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Labcorp Holdings Inc. grew EPS 18. 3% year-over-year, compared to -35. 5% for NeoGenomics, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, NEO leads at 12. 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.

Labcorp Holdings Inc.

(LH) is the more profitable company, earning 6. 3% net margin versus -14. 9% for NeoGenomics, Inc. — meaning it keeps 6. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LH leads at 10. 9% versus -9. 1% for NEO. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NEO leads at 38. 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.

On forward earnings alone, Labcorp Holdings Inc.

(LH) trades at 14. 8x forward P/E versus 61. 9x for NeoGenomics, Inc. — 47. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for NEO: 70. 4% to $19. 00.

In this comparison, LH (1.

1% yield) pays a dividend. NEO does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Labcorp Holdings Inc.

(LH) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 34), 1. 1% yield, +153. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (LH: +153. 6%, NEO: +42. 1%), 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.

LH pays a dividend while NEO 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.