Medical - Devices
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
NVNO vs NVCR vs MDT vs BSX vs ABT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Instruments & Supplies
Medical - Devices
Medical - Devices
Medical - Devices
NVNO vs NVCR vs MDT vs BSX vs ABT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Devices | Medical - Instruments & Supplies | Medical - Devices | Medical - Devices | Medical - Devices |
| Market Cap | $7M | $2.04B | $97.62B | $80.15B | $146.59B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $674M | $35.48B | $20.07B | $43.84B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-19M | $-173M | $4.61B | $2.89B | $13.98B |
| Gross Margin | — | 75.2% | 61.9% | 69.0% | 54.0% |
| Operating Margin | — | -27.2% | 17.9% | 19.8% | 17.8% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 13.8x | 16.0x | 15.4x |
| Total Debt | $700K | $290M | $28.52B | $12.42B | $15.28B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $3M | $103M | $2.22B | $2.04B | $7.62B |
NVNO vs NVCR vs MDT vs BSX vs ABT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| enVVeno Medical Cor… (NVNO) | 100 | 122.0 | +22.0% |
| NovoCure Limited (NVCR) | 100 | 26.5 | -73.5% |
| Medtronic plc (MDT) | 100 | 77.2 | -22.8% |
| Boston Scientific C… (BSX) | 100 | 142.0 | +42.0% |
| Abbott Laboratories (ABT) | 100 | 88.8 | -11.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NVNO vs NVCR vs MDT vs BSX vs ABT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NVNO ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +173.8% vs BSX's -47.8%
Among these 5 stocks, NVCR doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
MDT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 36 yrs, beta 0.42, yield 3.7%
- Beta 0.42, yield 3.7%, current ratio 1.85x
- Lower P/E (13.8x vs 16.0x)
- 3.7% yield, 36-year raise streak, vs ABT's 2.6%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
BSX is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 19.9%, EPS growth 55.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 16.5%
- 19.9% revenue growth vs MDT's 3.6%
ABT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- 166.6% 10Y total return vs BSX's 143.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.22, Low D/E 31.9%, current ratio 1.67x
- PEG 0.51 vs MDT's 35.17
- 31.9% margin vs NVCR's -25.7%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 19.9% revenue growth vs MDT's 3.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (13.8x vs 16.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 31.9% margin vs NVCR's -25.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.22 vs NVCR's 2.15, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.7% yield, 36-year raise streak, vs ABT's 2.6%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +173.8% vs BSX's -47.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 175.8% ROA vs NVNO's -60.4%, ROIC 6.0% vs -47.3% |
NVNO vs NVCR vs MDT vs BSX vs ABT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
NVNO vs NVCR vs MDT vs BSX vs ABT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MDT leads in 2 of 6 categories
BSX leads 1 • ABT leads 1 • NVNO leads 1 • NVCR leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BSX leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ABT and NVNO operate at a comparable scale, with $43.8B and $0 in trailing revenue. ABT is the more profitable business, keeping 31.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NVCR's -25.7%. On growth, BSX holds the edge at +15.9% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $674M | $35.5B | $20.1B | $43.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$20M | -$165M | $9.4B | $4.7B | $10.9B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$19M | -$173M | $4.6B | $2.9B | $14.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$15M | -$48M | $5.4B | $3.6B | $6.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +75.2% | +61.9% | +69.0% | +54.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | -27.2% | +17.9% | +19.8% | +17.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | -25.7% | +13.0% | +14.4% | +31.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | -7.1% | +15.2% | +18.1% | +15.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +12.3% | +8.8% | +15.9% | +6.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +97.8% | -100.0% | -11.9% | +18.5% | 0.0% |
Valuation Metrics
MDT leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 11.0x trailing earnings, ABT trades at a 60% valuation discount to BSX's 27.8x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ABT offers better value at 0.37x vs MDT's 35.17x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $7M | $2.0B | $97.6B | $80.1B | $146.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $4M | $2.2B | $123.9B | $90.5B | $154.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.30x | -14.66x | 21.09x | 27.80x | 11.03x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 13.80x | 15.96x | 15.40x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 35.17x | — | 0.37x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 14.06x | 24.25x | 15.36x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 3.11x | 2.91x | 3.99x | 3.49x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.22x | 5.86x | 2.04x | 3.29x | 3.08x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 18.83x | 21.91x | 23.08x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ABT leads this category, winning 4 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 $-66 for NVNO. NVNO carries lower financial leverage with a 0.03x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NVCR's 0.85x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BSX scores 7/9 vs NVNO's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -66.4% | -50.8% | +9.4% | +12.4% | +27.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -60.4% | -16.5% | +175.8% | +6.9% | +16.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -47.3% | -16.4% | +6.0% | +8.8% | +9.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -59.5% | -28.9% | +7.5% | +11.1% | +10.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.03x | 0.85x | 0.59x | 0.51x | 0.32x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$2M | $187M | $26.3B | $10.4B | $7.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $3M | $103M | $2.2B | $2.0B | $7.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $700,000 | $290M | $28.5B | $12.4B | $15.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -96.80x | 9.08x | 11.03x | 19.22x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NVNO leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in NVNO five years ago would be worth $18,790 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $983 for NVCR. Over the past 12 months, NVNO leads with a +173.8% total return vs BSX's -47.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NVNO at 39.8% vs NVCR's -36.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +2740.0% | +36.4% | -20.0% | -43.1% | -31.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +173.8% | +2.6% | -5.5% | -47.8% | -35.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +173.1% | -74.2% | -6.3% | +1.5% | -17.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +87.9% | -90.2% | -29.2% | +24.7% | -20.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -92.4% | +38.5% | +24.3% | +143.6% | +166.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +39.8% | -36.4% | -2.1% | +0.5% | -6.3% |
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 0.22 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NVCR's 2.15 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. NVCR currently trades 89.2% from its 52-week high vs BSX's 49.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.02x | 2.15x | 0.42x | 0.30x | 0.22x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $13.00 | $20.06 | $106.33 | $109.50 | $139.06 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.30 | $9.82 | $75.91 | $53.64 | $84.08 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +76.5% | +89.2% | +71.6% | +49.3% | +60.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 41.2 | 70.9 | 29.2 | 35.4 | 26.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 13K | 1.4M | 7.9M | 15.6M | 10.6M |
Analyst Outlook
MDT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NVCR as "Buy", MDT as "Buy", BSX as "Buy", ABT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 87.3% upside for NVCR (target: $34) vs 43.8% for MDT (target: $110). For income investors, MDT offers the higher dividend yield at 3.65% vs ABT's 2.60%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $33.50 | $109.50 | $91.33 | $128.71 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 15 | 49 | 43 | 41 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +3.7% | — | +2.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 36 | 0 | 11 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $2.78 | — | $2.19 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +3.3% | 0.0% | +0.9% |
MDT leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). BSX leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 1 tied.
NVNO vs NVCR vs MDT vs BSX vs ABT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NVNO or NVCR or MDT or BSX or ABT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Boston Scientific Corporation (BSX) is the stronger pick with 19.
9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 6% for Medtronic plc (MDT). Abbott Laboratories (ABT) offers the better valuation at 11. 0x trailing P/E (15. 4x 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 — NVNO or NVCR or MDT or BSX or ABT?
On trailing P/E, Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the cheapest at 11.
0x versus Boston Scientific Corporation at 27. 8x. On forward P/E, Medtronic plc is actually cheaper at 13. 8x — 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. 51x 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 — NVNO or NVCR or MDT or BSX or ABT?
Over the past 5 years, enVVeno Medical Corporation (NVNO) delivered a total return of +87.
9%, compared to -90. 2% for NovoCure Limited (NVCR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ABT returned +166. 6% versus NVNO's -92. 4%. 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 — NVNO or NVCR or MDT or BSX or ABT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
22β versus NovoCure Limited's 2. 15β — meaning NVCR is approximately 894% more volatile than ABT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, enVVeno Medical Corporation (NVNO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 3% versus 85% for NovoCure Limited — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NVNO or NVCR or MDT or BSX or ABT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Boston Scientific Corporation (BSX) is pulling ahead at 19.
9% versus 3. 6% for Medtronic plc (MDT). 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, BSX leads at 16. 5% 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 — NVNO or NVCR or MDT or BSX or ABT?
Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the more profitable company, earning 31.
9% net margin versus -20. 8% for NovoCure Limited — meaning it keeps 31. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: BSX leads at 19. 8% versus -23. 5% for NVCR. 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 NVNO or NVCR or MDT or BSX or ABT 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. 51x versus Medtronic plc's 35. 17x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Medtronic plc (MDT) trades at 13. 8x forward P/E versus 16. 0x for Boston Scientific Corporation — 2. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for NVCR: 87. 3% to $33. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — NVNO or NVCR or MDT or BSX or ABT?
In this comparison, MDT (3.
7% yield), ABT (2. 6% yield) pay a dividend. NVNO, NVCR, BSX do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is NVNO or NVCR or MDT or BSX or ABT 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.
22), 2. 6% yield, +166. 6% 10Y return). enVVeno Medical Corporation (NVNO) carries a higher beta of 2. 02 — 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: +166. 6%, NVNO: -92. 4%), 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 NVNO and NVCR and MDT and BSX and ABT?
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: NVNO is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NVCR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MDT is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; BSX is a mid-cap high-growth stock; ABT is a mid-cap deep-value stock. MDT, ABT pay a dividend while NVNO, NVCR, BSX 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.