NVS vs AZN

For growth investors, AstraZeneca PLC (AZN) is the stronger pick with 8.

6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 6. 0% for Novartis AG (NVS). Novartis AG (NVS) offers the better valuation at 20. 6x trailing P/E (16. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate AstraZeneca PLC (AZN) a "Buy" — based on 41 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 trailing P/E, Novartis AG (NVS) is the cheapest at 20.

6x versus AstraZeneca PLC at 28. 3x. On forward P/E, Novartis AG is actually cheaper at 16. 9x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: AstraZeneca PLC wins at 0. 82x versus Novartis AG's 1. 10x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Novartis AG (NVS) delivered a total return of +99.

3%, compared to +87. 0% for AstraZeneca PLC (AZN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AZN returned +290. 3% versus NVS's +188. 8%. 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), Novartis AG (NVS) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

42β versus AstraZeneca PLC's 0. 67β — meaning AZN is approximately 58% more volatile than NVS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, AstraZeneca PLC (AZN) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 61% versus 80% for Novartis AG — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), AstraZeneca PLC (AZN) is pulling ahead at 8.

6% versus 6. 0% for Novartis AG (NVS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: AstraZeneca PLC grew EPS 190. 7% year-over-year, compared to 22. 5% for Novartis AG. Over a 3-year CAGR, AZN leads at 9. 8% 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.

Novartis AG (NVS) is the more profitable company, earning 25.

6% net margin versus 17. 5% for AstraZeneca PLC — meaning it keeps 25. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NVS leads at 31. 2% versus 23. 4% for AZN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AZN leads at 81. 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.

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, AstraZeneca PLC (AZN) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 82x versus Novartis AG's 1. 10x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Novartis AG (NVS) trades at 16. 9x forward P/E versus 18. 0x for AstraZeneca PLC — 1. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for AZN: 14. 1% to $211. 00.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Novartis AG (NVS) offers the highest yield at 2. 7%, versus 1. 8% for AstraZeneca PLC (AZN).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Novartis AG (NVS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

42), 2. 7% yield, +188. 8% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (NVS: +188. 8%, AZN: +290. 3%), 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.

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.