Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
NEOG vs TMO vs DHR vs BIO vs IQV
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Devices
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
NEOG vs TMO vs DHR vs BIO vs IQV — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Devices | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| Market Cap | $2.01B | $176.36B | $124.33B | $6.95B | $30.32B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $880M | $45.20B | $24.78B | $2.59B | $16.63B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-603M | $6.86B | $3.69B | $169M | $1.39B |
| Gross Margin | 38.0% | 39.4% | 60.7% | 51.9% | 26.1% |
| Operating Margin | -2.0% | 17.8% | 21.0% | 9.2% | 13.9% |
| Forward P/E | 25.9x | 19.1x | 20.8x | 25.0x | 14.1x |
| Total Debt | $913M | $40.85B | $18.42B | $1.53B | $16.17B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $129M | $9.86B | $4.62B | $532M | $1.98B |
NEOG vs TMO vs DHR vs BIO vs IQV — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neogen Corporation (NEOG) | 100 | 26.0 | -74.0% |
| Thermo Fisher Scien… (TMO) | 100 | 135.9 | +35.9% |
| Danaher Corporation (DHR) | 100 | 118.9 | +18.9% |
| Bio-Rad Laboratorie… (BIO) | 100 | 52.4 | -47.6% |
| IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) | 100 | 119.5 | +19.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NEOG vs TMO vs DHR vs BIO vs IQV
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NEOG ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +56.0% vs DHR's -8.3%
TMO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding.
- 229.1% 10Y total return vs DHR's 219.3%
- 15.2% margin vs NEOG's -68.5%
- 0.4% yield, 8-year raise streak, vs DHR's 0.7%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
- 6.4% ROA vs NEOG's -17.9%, ROIC 7.5% vs 0.2%
DHR is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.94, yield 0.7%
- Beta 0.94, yield 0.7%, current ratio 1.87x
BIO is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.92, Low D/E 20.5%, current ratio 5.62x
- Beta 0.92 vs NEOG's 1.83, lower leverage
IQV is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and valuation efficiency is your priority.
- Rev growth 5.9%, EPS growth 4.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 4.2%
- PEG 0.35 vs DHR's 34.35
- 5.9% revenue growth vs NEOG's -3.2%
- Lower P/E (14.1x vs 25.0x)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 5.9% revenue growth vs NEOG's -3.2% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.1x vs 25.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 15.2% margin vs NEOG's -68.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.92 vs NEOG's 1.83, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 0.4% yield, 8-year raise streak, vs DHR's 0.7%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +56.0% vs DHR's -8.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 6.4% ROA vs NEOG's -17.9%, ROIC 7.5% vs 0.2% |
NEOG vs TMO vs DHR vs BIO vs IQV — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
NEOG vs TMO vs DHR vs BIO vs IQV — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
IQV leads in 2 of 6 categories
DHR leads 1 • NEOG leads 0 • TMO leads 0 • BIO leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
DHR leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TMO is the larger business by revenue, generating $45.2B annually — 51.3x NEOG's $880M. TMO is the more profitable business, keeping 15.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NEOG's -68.5%. On growth, IQV holds the edge at +8.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $880M | $45.2B | $24.8B | $2.6B | $16.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $100M | $10.5B | $7.2B | -$315M | $3.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$603M | $6.9B | $3.7B | $169M | $1.4B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $17M | $6.7B | $5.3B | $357M | $2.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +38.0% | +39.4% | +60.7% | +51.9% | +26.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -2.0% | +17.8% | +21.0% | +9.2% | +13.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -68.5% | +15.2% | +14.9% | +6.5% | +8.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +2.0% | +14.9% | +21.4% | +13.8% | +16.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -2.8% | +6.2% | +3.7% | +1.1% | +8.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +96.5% | +11.3% | +9.8% | -9.5% | +15.0% |
Valuation Metrics
IQV leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 9.2x trailing earnings, BIO trades at a 74% valuation discount to DHR's 34.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), IQV offers better value at 0.56x vs DHR's 34.35x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.0B | $176.4B | $124.3B | $6.9B | $30.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.8B | $207.4B | $138.1B | $7.9B | $44.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -1.84x | 26.75x | 34.85x | 9.23x | 22.79x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 25.87x | 19.11x | 20.82x | 25.00x | 14.06x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 12.67x | 34.35x | — | 0.56x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 20.70x | 19.04x | 18.21x | 16.70x | 12.97x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.25x | 3.96x | 5.06x | 2.69x | 1.86x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.97x | 3.34x | 2.38x | 0.94x | 4.67x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 28.02x | 23.64x | 18.55x | 14.78x |
Profitability & Efficiency
IQV leads this category, winning 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
IQV delivers a 22.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $22 in annual profit, vs $-29 for NEOG. BIO carries lower financial leverage with a 0.21x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to IQV's 2.44x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), DHR scores 7/9 vs NEOG's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -28.6% | +13.2% | +7.1% | +2.4% | +22.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -17.9% | +6.4% | +4.5% | +2.2% | +4.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +0.2% | +7.5% | +5.9% | +2.6% | +8.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +0.2% | +9.1% | +7.0% | +2.9% | +11.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.44x | 0.76x | 0.35x | 0.21x | 2.44x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $784M | $31.0B | $13.8B | $999M | $14.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $129M | $9.9B | $4.6B | $532M | $2.0B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $913M | $40.9B | $18.4B | $1.5B | $16.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -8.33x | 5.89x | 18.13x | -2.49x | 3.10x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — NEOG and TMO and IQV each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in TMO five years ago would be worth $10,283 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,940 for NEOG. Over the past 12 months, NEOG leads with a +56.0% total return vs DHR's -8.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors IQV at -2.0% vs NEOG's -18.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +32.1% | -19.8% | -23.6% | -15.7% | -20.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +56.0% | +16.8% | -8.3% | +10.7% | +16.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -46.1% | -11.7% | -15.5% | -32.0% | -5.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -80.6% | +2.8% | -21.1% | -57.7% | -23.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -49.8% | +229.1% | +219.3% | +81.4% | +166.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -18.6% | -4.0% | -5.5% | -12.1% | -2.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — NEOG and BIO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
BIO is the less volatile stock with a 0.92 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NEOG's 1.83 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. NEOG currently trades 80.9% from its 52-week high vs IQV's 72.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.83x | 1.10x | 0.94x | 0.92x | 1.33x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $11.43 | $643.99 | $242.80 | $343.12 | $247.05 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $4.53 | $385.46 | $172.06 | $211.43 | $134.65 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +80.9% | +73.7% | +72.3% | +75.0% | +72.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 46.2 | 43.1 | 33.0 | 37.0 | 58.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.5M | 1.9M | 4.2M | 306K | 1.6M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — TMO and DHR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NEOG as "Hold", TMO as "Buy", DHR as "Buy", BIO as "Buy", IQV as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 40.6% upside for DHR (target: $247) vs 18.9% for NEOG (target: $11). For income investors, DHR offers the higher dividend yield at 0.70% vs TMO's 0.36%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $11.00 | $654.67 | $247.00 | $312.50 | $225.63 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 11 | 42 | 42 | 14 | 44 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.4% | +0.7% | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 8 | 1 | — | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.69 | $1.23 | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.7% | +2.5% | +4.3% | +4.1% |
IQV leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). DHR leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 3 tied.
NEOG vs TMO vs DHR vs BIO vs IQV: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NEOG or TMO or DHR or BIO or IQV a better buy right now?
For growth investors, IQVIA Holdings Inc.
(IQV) is the stronger pick with 5. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 2% for Neogen Corporation (NEOG). Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. (BIO) offers the better valuation at 9. 2x trailing P/E (25. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. (TMO) a "Buy" — based on 42 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 — NEOG or TMO or DHR or BIO or IQV?
On trailing P/E, Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc.
(BIO) is the cheapest at 9. 2x versus Danaher Corporation at 34. 9x. On forward P/E, IQVIA Holdings Inc. 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: IQVIA Holdings Inc. wins at 0. 35x versus Danaher Corporation's 34. 35x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NEOG or TMO or DHR or BIO or IQV?
Over the past 5 years, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.
(TMO) delivered a total return of +2. 8%, compared to -80. 6% for Neogen Corporation (NEOG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: TMO returned +229. 1% versus NEOG's -49. 8%. 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 — NEOG or TMO or DHR or BIO or IQV?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc.
(BIO) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 92β versus Neogen Corporation's 1. 83β — meaning NEOG is approximately 98% more volatile than BIO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. (BIO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 21% versus 2% for IQVIA Holdings Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NEOG or TMO or DHR or BIO or IQV?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), IQVIA Holdings Inc.
(IQV) is pulling ahead at 5. 9% versus -3. 2% for Neogen Corporation (NEOG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. grew EPS 142. 6% year-over-year, compared to -114. 6% for Neogen Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, NEOG leads at 19. 3% 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 — NEOG or TMO or DHR or BIO or IQV?
Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc.
(BIO) is the more profitable company, earning 29. 4% net margin versus -122. 1% for Neogen Corporation — meaning it keeps 29. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: DHR leads at 20. 9% versus 1. 1% for NEOG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — DHR leads at 60. 9%, 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 NEOG or TMO or DHR or BIO or IQV 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, IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 35x versus Danaher Corporation's 34. 35x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) trades at 14. 1x forward P/E versus 25. 9x for Neogen Corporation — 11. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for DHR: 40. 6% to $247. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — NEOG or TMO or DHR or BIO or IQV?
In this comparison, DHR (0.
7% yield), TMO (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. NEOG, BIO, IQV do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is NEOG or TMO or DHR or BIO or IQV better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Danaher Corporation (DHR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
94), 0. 7% yield, +219. 3% 10Y return). Neogen Corporation (NEOG) carries a higher beta of 1. 83 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (DHR: +219. 3%, NEOG: -49. 8%), 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 NEOG and TMO and DHR and BIO and IQV?
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: NEOG is a small-cap quality compounder stock; TMO is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; DHR is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; BIO is a small-cap deep-value stock; IQV is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. DHR pays a dividend while NEOG, TMO, BIO, IQV 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.