Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
NRXS vs LIVN vs INVA vs ELMD vs MDT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Devices
Biotechnology
Medical - Devices
Medical - Devices
NRXS vs LIVN vs INVA vs ELMD vs MDT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Medical - Devices | Biotechnology | Medical - Devices | Medical - Devices |
| Market Cap | $87M | $3.95B | $1.69B | $223M | $97.62B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $4M | $1.43B | $424M | $69M | $35.48B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-8M | $107M | $504M | $9M | $4.61B |
| Gross Margin | 84.2% | 67.5% | 76.2% | 78.2% | 61.9% |
| Operating Margin | -219.4% | 13.4% | 14.8% | 16.7% | 17.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | 16.9x | 7.3x | 24.5x | 13.8x |
| Total Debt | $214K | $473M | $269M | $198K | $28.52B |
| Cash & Equiv. | — | $636M | $551M | $15M | $2.22B |
NRXS vs LIVN vs INVA vs ELMD vs MDT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Aug 23 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| NeurAxis, Inc. (NRXS) | 100 | 192.5 | +92.5% |
| LivaNova PLC (LIVN) | 100 | 129.4 | +29.4% |
| Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) | 100 | 179.5 | +79.5% |
| Electromed, Inc. (ELMD) | 100 | 271.5 | +171.5% |
| Medtronic plc (MDT) | 100 | 93.4 | -6.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NRXS vs LIVN vs INVA vs ELMD vs MDT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NRXS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth and momentum is your priority.
- 32.9% revenue growth vs MDT's 3.6%
- +276.1% vs MDT's -5.5%
LIVN lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
INVA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 18.5%, EPS growth 8.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 8.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.11, Low D/E 22.9%, current ratio 14.64x
- PEG 0.71 vs MDT's 35.17
- Beta 0.11, current ratio 14.64x
ELMD is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 484.2% 10Y total return vs INVA's 95.6%
MDT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 36 yrs, beta 0.42, yield 3.7%
- 3.7% yield; 36-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
- 175.8% ROA vs NRXS's -196.3%, ROIC 6.0% vs -477.9%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 32.9% revenue growth vs MDT's 3.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.3x vs 13.8x), PEG 0.71 vs 35.17 | |
| Quality / Margins | 118.9% margin vs NRXS's -218.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.11 vs NRXS's 1.40 | |
| Dividends | 3.7% yield; 36-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +276.1% vs MDT's -5.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 175.8% ROA vs NRXS's -196.3%, ROIC 6.0% vs -477.9% |
NRXS vs LIVN vs INVA vs ELMD vs MDT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
NRXS vs LIVN vs INVA vs ELMD vs MDT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
INVA leads in 2 of 6 categories
ELMD leads 2 • MDT leads 1 • NRXS leads 0 • LIVN leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
INVA leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MDT is the larger business by revenue, generating $35.5B annually — 9941.5x NRXS's $4M. INVA is the more profitable business, keeping 118.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NRXS's -2.2%. On growth, NRXS holds the edge at +27.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $4M | $1.4B | $424M | $69M | $35.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$8M | $220M | $86M | $12M | $9.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$8M | $107M | $504M | $9M | $4.6B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$6M | $161M | $181M | $9M | $5.4B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +84.2% | +67.5% | +76.2% | +78.2% | +61.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -2.2% | +13.4% | +14.8% | +16.7% | +17.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -2.2% | +7.5% | +118.9% | +13.1% | +13.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -181.1% | +11.2% | +42.6% | +13.4% | +15.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +27.2% | +14.3% | +10.6% | +16.3% | +8.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +33.3% | +106.7% | +4.0% | +45.5% | -11.9% |
Valuation Metrics
INVA leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 6.9x trailing earnings, INVA trades at a 78% valuation discount to ELMD's 31.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), INVA offers better value at 0.67x vs MDT's 35.17x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $87M | $3.9B | $1.7B | $223M | $97.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $88M | $3.8B | $1.4B | $208M | $123.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -8.63x | -16.15x | 6.94x | 31.31x | 21.09x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 16.92x | 7.31x | 24.48x | 13.80x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.67x | 2.44x | 35.17x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 15.68x | 6.90x | 19.19x | 14.06x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 24.47x | 2.84x | 3.97x | 3.48x | 2.91x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 21.91x | 3.26x | 1.65x | 5.43x | 2.04x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 22.79x | 8.63x | 20.11x | 18.83x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ELMD leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
INVA delivers a 47.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $48 in annual profit, vs $-3 for NRXS. ELMD carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MDT's 0.59x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ELMD scores 7/9 vs NRXS's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -3.1% | +9.1% | +47.6% | +19.8% | +9.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -196.3% | +4.2% | +32.4% | +16.4% | +175.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -4.8% | +11.5% | +14.2% | +25.6% | +6.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | — | +10.2% | +12.4% | +22.0% | +7.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.06x | 0.39x | 0.23x | 0.00x | 0.59x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $214,045 | -$162M | -$282M | -$15M | $26.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | — | $636M | $551M | $15M | $2.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $214,045 | $473M | $269M | $198,000 | $28.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 5.18x | 63.45x | — | 9.08x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
ELMD leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ELMD five years ago would be worth $26,849 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $7,076 for MDT. Over the past 12 months, NRXS leads with a +276.1% total return vs MDT's -5.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ELMD at 34.9% vs MDT's -2.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +83.9% | +18.5% | +15.2% | -1.7% | -20.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +276.1% | +63.1% | +23.2% | +21.1% | -5.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +36.7% | +52.5% | +96.0% | +145.3% | -6.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +36.7% | -13.3% | +94.5% | +168.5% | -29.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +36.7% | +48.1% | +95.6% | +484.2% | +24.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +11.0% | +15.1% | +25.1% | +34.9% | -2.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — LIVN and INVA each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
INVA is the less volatile stock with a 0.11 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NRXS's 1.40 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. LIVN currently trades 99.1% from its 52-week high vs MDT's 71.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.40x | 1.33x | 0.11x | 1.01x | 0.42x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $9.33 | $72.50 | $25.15 | $30.73 | $106.33 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.00 | $41.02 | $16.52 | $17.73 | $75.91 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +87.9% | +99.1% | +91.0% | +87.6% | +71.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 68.4 | 65.0 | 44.7 | 63.1 | 29.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 197K | 802K | 604K | 41K | 7.9M |
Analyst Outlook
MDT leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LIVN as "Buy", INVA as "Buy", ELMD as "Buy", MDT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 74.7% upside for INVA (target: $40) vs 10.3% for LIVN (target: $79). MDT is the only dividend payer here at 3.65% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $79.25 | $40.00 | $38.00 | $109.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 14 | 10 | 4 | 49 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | +3.7% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 0 | — | 36 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | $2.78 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.1% | +0.3% | +4.5% | +3.3% |
INVA leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). ELMD leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). 1 tied.
NRXS vs LIVN vs INVA vs ELMD vs MDT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NRXS or LIVN or INVA or ELMD or MDT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, NeurAxis, Inc.
(NRXS) is the stronger pick with 32. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 6% for Medtronic plc (MDT). Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) offers the better valuation at 6. 9x trailing P/E (7. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate LivaNova PLC (LIVN) a "Buy" — based on 14 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 — NRXS or LIVN or INVA or ELMD or MDT?
On trailing P/E, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the cheapest at 6. 9x versus Electromed, Inc. at 31. 3x. On forward P/E, Innoviva, Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 3x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Innoviva, Inc. wins at 0. 71x versus Medtronic plc's 35. 17x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NRXS or LIVN or INVA or ELMD or MDT?
Over the past 5 years, Electromed, Inc.
(ELMD) delivered a total return of +168. 5%, compared to -29. 2% for Medtronic plc (MDT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ELMD returned +484. 2% versus MDT's +24. 3%. 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 — NRXS or LIVN or INVA or ELMD or MDT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 11β versus NeurAxis, Inc. 's 1. 40β — meaning NRXS is approximately 1131% more volatile than INVA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Electromed, Inc. (ELMD) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 59% for Medtronic plc — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NRXS or LIVN or INVA or ELMD or MDT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), NeurAxis, Inc.
(NRXS) is pulling ahead at 32. 9% versus 3. 6% for Medtronic plc (MDT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Innoviva, Inc. grew EPS 816. 7% year-over-year, compared to -483. 6% for LivaNova PLC. Over a 3-year CAGR, ELMD leads at 15. 4% 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 — NRXS or LIVN or INVA or ELMD or MDT?
Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the more profitable company, earning 63. 8% net margin versus -218. 5% for NeurAxis, Inc. — meaning it keeps 63. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: INVA leads at 38. 5% versus -219. 4% for NRXS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NRXS leads at 84. 2%, 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 NRXS or LIVN or INVA or ELMD 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, Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 71x versus Medtronic plc's 35. 17x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) trades at 7. 3x forward P/E versus 24. 5x for Electromed, Inc. — 17. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for INVA: 74. 7% to $40. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — NRXS or LIVN or INVA or ELMD or MDT?
In this comparison, MDT (3.
7% yield) pays a dividend. NRXS, LIVN, INVA, ELMD do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is NRXS or LIVN or INVA or ELMD or MDT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Medtronic plc (MDT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
42), 3. 7% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MDT: +24. 3%, NRXS: +36. 7%), 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 NRXS and LIVN and INVA and ELMD 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: NRXS is a small-cap high-growth stock; LIVN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; INVA is a small-cap high-growth stock; ELMD is a small-cap high-growth stock; MDT is a mid-cap income-oriented stock. MDT pays a dividend while NRXS, LIVN, INVA, ELMD 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.