Medical - Pharmaceuticals
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
POM vs DOCS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Healthcare Information Services
POM vs DOCS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Pharmaceuticals | Medical - Healthcare Information Services |
| Market Cap | $57M | $5.24B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $343M | $638M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-143M | $239M |
| Gross Margin | 13.9% | 89.7% |
| Operating Margin | -7.5% | 37.4% |
| Forward P/E | — | 16.8x |
| Total Debt | $441M | $12M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $8M | $210M |
Quick Verdict: POM vs DOCS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
In this particular matchup, POM is outpaced on most metrics by others in the set.
DOCS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- beta 1.03
- Rev growth 20.0%, EPS growth 54.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 18.4%
- -50.9% 10Y total return vs POM's -86.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 20.0% revenue growth vs POM's 12.4% | |
| Quality / Margins | 37.5% margin vs POM's -41.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.03 vs POM's 1.45 | |
| Dividends | Tie | Neither stock pays a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | -55.4% vs POM's -86.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 20.7% ROA vs POM's -254.8% |
POM vs DOCS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
POM vs DOCS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
DOCS leads this category, winning 4 of 4 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
DOCS is the larger business by revenue, generating $638M annually — 1.9x POM's $343M. DOCS is the more profitable business, keeping 37.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to POM's -41.9%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $343M | $638M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | — | $250M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | — | $239M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | — | $314M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +13.9% | +89.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -7.5% | +37.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -41.9% | +37.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -4.7% | +49.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +9.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -16.2% |
Valuation Metrics
POM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $57M | $5.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $120M | $5.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -2.99x | 23.45x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 16.83x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.30x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 21.14x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.13x | 9.18x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 4.84x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 19.64x |
Profitability & Efficiency
DOCS leads this category, winning 4 of 4 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), DOCS scores 9/9 vs POM's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | +24.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -2.5% | +20.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | +20.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | — | +22.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 9 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.01x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $433M | -$197M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $8M | $210M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $441M | $12M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -1.99x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
DOCS leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in DOCS five years ago would be worth $4,911 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,318 for POM. Over the past 12 months, DOCS leads with a -55.4% total return vs POM's -86.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors DOCS at -8.8% vs POM's -49.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +62.9% | -39.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -86.8% | -55.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -86.8% | -24.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -86.8% | -50.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -86.8% | -50.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -49.1% | -8.8% |
Risk & Volatility
DOCS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
DOCS is the less volatile stock with a 1.03 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than POM's 1.45 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. DOCS currently trades 34.0% from its 52-week high vs POM's 8.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.45x | 1.03x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $6.43 | $76.51 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.19 | $20.55 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +8.3% | +34.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 66.5 | 60.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.4M | 2.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $42.79 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 22 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +2.3% |
DOCS leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). POM leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics).
POM vs DOCS: Frequently Asked Questions
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is POM or DOCS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Doximity, Inc.
(DOCS) is the stronger pick with 20. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 12. 4% for POMDOCTOR Ltd (POM). Doximity, Inc. (DOCS) offers the better valuation at 23. 5x trailing P/E (16. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Doximity, Inc. (DOCS) a "Buy" — based on 22 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 is the better long-term investment — POM or DOCS?
Over the past 5 years, Doximity, Inc.
(DOCS) delivered a total return of -50. 9%, compared to -86. 8% for POMDOCTOR Ltd (POM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: DOCS returned -50. 9% versus POM's -86. 8%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — POM or DOCS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Doximity, Inc.
(DOCS) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 03β versus POMDOCTOR Ltd's 1. 45β — meaning POM is approximately 41% more volatile than DOCS relative to the S&P 500.
04Which is growing faster — POM or DOCS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Doximity, Inc.
(DOCS) is pulling ahead at 20. 0% versus 12. 4% for POMDOCTOR Ltd (POM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Doximity, Inc. grew EPS 54. 2% year-over-year, compared to 1. 6% for POMDOCTOR Ltd. Over a 3-year CAGR, DOCS leads at 18. 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.
05Which has better profit margins — POM or DOCS?
Doximity, Inc.
(DOCS) is the more profitable company, earning 39. 1% net margin versus -41. 9% for POMDOCTOR Ltd — meaning it keeps 39. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: DOCS leads at 39. 9% versus -7. 5% for POM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — DOCS leads at 90. 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.
06Which pays a better dividend — POM or DOCS?
None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.
All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.
07Is POM or DOCS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Doximity, Inc.
(DOCS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 03)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (DOCS: -50. 9%, POM: -86. 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.
08What are the main differences between POM and DOCS?
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: POM is a small-cap quality compounder stock; DOCS is a small-cap high-growth stock. 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 both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.