Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
QGEN vs ILMN vs NEOG vs EXAS vs NTRA
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
QGEN vs ILMN vs NEOG vs EXAS vs NTRA — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| Market Cap | $6.91B | $21.07B | $2.01B | $20.02B | $31.16B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $2.09B | $4.39B | $880M | $3.25B | $2.31B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $425M | $853M | $-603M | $-208M | $-208M |
| Gross Margin | 61.8% | 67.1% | 38.0% | 69.7% | 64.8% |
| Operating Margin | 24.9% | 20.9% | -2.0% | -6.4% | -13.4% |
| Forward P/E | 13.4x | 26.8x | 25.9x | 582.8x | — |
| Total Debt | $1.65B | $2.55B | $913M | $2.52B | $214M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $839M | $1.42B | $129M | $956M | $1.08B |
QGEN vs ILMN vs NEOG vs EXAS vs NTRA — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Qiagen N.V. (QGEN) | 100 | 72.2 | -27.8% |
| Illumina, Inc. (ILMN) | 100 | 39.3 | -60.7% |
| Neogen Corporation (NEOG) | 100 | 26.0 | -74.0% |
| Exact Sciences Corp… (EXAS) | 100 | 120.4 | +20.4% |
| Natera, Inc. (NTRA) | 100 | 501.3 | +401.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: QGEN vs ILMN vs NEOG vs EXAS vs NTRA
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
QGEN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for sleep-well-at-night and valuation efficiency.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.42, Low D/E 43.8%, current ratio 3.90x
- PEG 0.30 vs ILMN's 6.33
- Beta 0.42, yield 0.8%, current ratio 3.90x
- Better valuation composite
ILMN ranks third and is worth considering specifically for efficiency.
- 13.4% ROA vs NEOG's -17.9%, ROIC 16.8% vs 0.2%
Among these 5 stocks, NEOG doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
EXAS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability is your priority.
- beta 0.12
- Beta 0.12 vs NEOG's 1.83
- +96.9% vs QGEN's -15.4%
NTRA is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 35.9%, EPS growth 0.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 41.1%
- 20.9% 10Y total return vs EXAS's 16.7%
- 35.9% revenue growth vs NEOG's -3.2%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 35.9% revenue growth vs NEOG's -3.2% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 20.3% margin vs NEOG's -68.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.12 vs NEOG's 1.83 | |
| Dividends | 0.8% yield; 1-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +96.9% vs QGEN's -15.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.4% ROA vs NEOG's -17.9%, ROIC 16.8% vs 0.2% |
QGEN vs ILMN vs NEOG vs EXAS vs NTRA — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
QGEN vs ILMN vs NEOG vs EXAS vs NTRA — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
QGEN leads in 1 of 6 categories
ILMN leads 1 • NTRA leads 1 • EXAS leads 1 • NEOG leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — QGEN and NTRA each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ILMN is the larger business by revenue, generating $4.4B annually — 5.0x NEOG's $880M. QGEN is the more profitable business, keeping 20.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NEOG's -68.5%. On growth, NTRA holds the edge at +39.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $2.1B | $4.4B | $880M | $3.2B | $2.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $714M | $1.1B | $100M | -$41M | -$310M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $425M | $853M | -$603M | -$208M | -$208M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $453M | $989M | $17M | $357M | $97M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +61.8% | +67.1% | +38.0% | +69.7% | +64.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +24.9% | +20.9% | -2.0% | -6.4% | -13.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +20.3% | +19.4% | -68.5% | -6.4% | -9.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +21.7% | +22.5% | +2.0% | +11.0% | +4.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +3.7% | +4.8% | -2.8% | +23.1% | +39.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +26.8% | +6.1% | +96.5% | +90.4% | +185.4% |
Valuation Metrics
QGEN leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 16.4x trailing earnings, QGEN trades at a 35% valuation discount to ILMN's 25.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), QGEN offers better value at 0.37x vs ILMN's 6.01x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $6.9B | $21.1B | $2.0B | $20.0B | $31.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $7.7B | $22.2B | $2.8B | $21.6B | $30.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 16.44x | 25.45x | -1.84x | -95.37x | -144.62x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 13.42x | 26.77x | 25.87x | 582.83x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.37x | 6.01x | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 10.82x | 19.58x | 20.70x | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 3.31x | 4.86x | 2.25x | 6.16x | 13.51x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.85x | 7.95x | 0.97x | 8.24x | 17.55x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 15.24x | 22.63x | — | 56.10x | 285.53x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ILMN leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ILMN delivers a 32.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $33 in annual profit, vs $-29 for NEOG. NTRA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.13x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to EXAS's 1.05x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), QGEN scores 8/9 vs NEOG's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +11.9% | +32.8% | -28.6% | -8.7% | -15.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +7.0% | +13.4% | -17.9% | -3.5% | -10.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +8.6% | +16.8% | +0.2% | -3.6% | -36.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +9.5% | +17.6% | +0.2% | -4.0% | -18.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 8 | 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.44x | 0.94x | 0.44x | 1.05x | 0.13x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $815M | $1.1B | $784M | $1.6B | -$862M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $839M | $1.4B | $129M | $956M | $1.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.7B | $2.6B | $913M | $2.5B | $214M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 15.74x | 12.09x | -8.33x | -5.47x | -25.21x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NTRA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in NTRA five years ago would be worth $21,587 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,940 for NEOG. Over the past 12 months, EXAS leads with a +96.9% total return vs QGEN's -15.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NTRA at 60.6% vs NEOG's -18.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -20.7% | +3.2% | +32.1% | +3.1% | -3.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -15.4% | +81.7% | +56.0% | +96.9% | +37.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -20.7% | -27.1% | -46.1% | +53.0% | +314.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -23.3% | -62.8% | -80.6% | +0.4% | +115.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +65.1% | +0.7% | -49.8% | +1669.1% | +2089.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -7.5% | -10.0% | -18.6% | +15.2% | +60.6% |
Risk & Volatility
EXAS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
EXAS is the less volatile stock with a 0.12 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. EXAS currently trades 99.9% from its 52-week high vs QGEN's 58.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.42x | 1.23x | 1.83x | 0.12x | 1.26x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $57.82 | $155.53 | $11.43 | $104.98 | $256.36 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $33.17 | $73.86 | $4.53 | $38.81 | $131.81 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +58.0% | +89.2% | +80.9% | +99.9% | +85.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 29.3 | 65.2 | 46.2 | 76.4 | 57.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.9M | 1.5M | 2.5M | 4.2M | 1.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: QGEN as "Hold", ILMN as "Buy", NEOG as "Hold", EXAS as "Buy", NTRA as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 41.7% upside for QGEN (target: $48) vs -1.6% for EXAS (target: $103). QGEN is the only dividend payer here at 0.78% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $47.50 | $147.38 | $11.00 | $103.18 | $262.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 29 | 50 | 11 | 41 | 27 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.8% | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.26 | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +4.4% | +3.5% | 0.0% | +0.1% | 0.0% |
QGEN leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). ILMN leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 1 tied.
QGEN vs ILMN vs NEOG vs EXAS vs NTRA: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is QGEN or ILMN or NEOG or EXAS or NTRA a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Natera, Inc.
(NTRA) is the stronger pick with 35. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 2% for Neogen Corporation (NEOG). Qiagen N. V. (QGEN) offers the better valuation at 16. 4x trailing P/E (13. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Illumina, Inc. (ILMN) a "Buy" — based on 50 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 — QGEN or ILMN or NEOG or EXAS or NTRA?
On trailing P/E, Qiagen N.
V. (QGEN) is the cheapest at 16. 4x versus Illumina, Inc. at 25. 5x. On forward P/E, Qiagen N. V. is actually cheaper at 13. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Qiagen N. V. wins at 0. 30x versus Illumina, Inc. 's 6. 33x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — QGEN or ILMN or NEOG or EXAS or NTRA?
Over the past 5 years, Natera, Inc.
(NTRA) delivered a total return of +115. 9%, compared to -80. 6% for Neogen Corporation (NEOG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NTRA returned +20. 9% 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 — QGEN or ILMN or NEOG or EXAS or NTRA?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Exact Sciences Corporation (EXAS) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
12β versus Neogen Corporation's 1. 83β — meaning NEOG is approximately 1418% more volatile than EXAS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Natera, Inc. (NTRA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 13% versus 105% for Exact Sciences Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — QGEN or ILMN or NEOG or EXAS or NTRA?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Natera, Inc.
(NTRA) is pulling ahead at 35. 9% versus -3. 2% for Neogen Corporation (NEOG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Qiagen N. V. grew EPS 436. 8% year-over-year, compared to -114. 6% for Neogen Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, NTRA leads at 41. 1% 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 — QGEN or ILMN or NEOG or EXAS or NTRA?
Qiagen N.
V. (QGEN) is the more profitable company, earning 20. 3% net margin versus -122. 1% for Neogen Corporation — meaning it keeps 20. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: QGEN leads at 24. 9% versus -13. 4% for NTRA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — EXAS leads at 69. 7%, 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 QGEN or ILMN or NEOG or EXAS or NTRA 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, Qiagen N. V. (QGEN) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 30x versus Illumina, Inc. 's 6. 33x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Qiagen N. V. (QGEN) trades at 13. 4x forward P/E versus 582. 8x for Exact Sciences Corporation — 569. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for QGEN: 41. 7% to $47. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — QGEN or ILMN or NEOG or EXAS or NTRA?
In this comparison, QGEN (0.
8% yield) pays a dividend. ILMN, NEOG, EXAS, NTRA do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is QGEN or ILMN or NEOG or EXAS or NTRA better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Exact Sciences Corporation (EXAS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
12), +1669% 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 (EXAS: +1669%, 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 QGEN and ILMN and NEOG and EXAS and NTRA?
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: QGEN is a small-cap deep-value stock; ILMN is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; NEOG is a small-cap quality compounder stock; EXAS is a mid-cap high-growth stock; NTRA is a mid-cap high-growth stock. QGEN pays a dividend while ILMN, NEOG, EXAS, NTRA 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.