Medical - Devices
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
RPID vs AZTA vs BRKR vs QGEN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Instruments & Supplies
Medical - Devices
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
RPID vs AZTA vs BRKR vs QGEN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Devices | Medical - Instruments & Supplies | Medical - Devices | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| Market Cap | $117M | $885M | $6.72B | $6.81B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $31M | $597M | $3.46B | $2.09B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-44M | $-178M | $-12M | $425M |
| Gross Margin | 18.4% | 44.6% | 45.3% | 61.8% |
| Operating Margin | -148.8% | -2.6% | 4.9% | 24.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | 37.0x | 20.8x | 13.5x |
| Total Debt | $24M | $111M | $2.04B | $1.65B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $20M | $280M | $299M | $839M |
RPID vs AZTA vs BRKR vs QGEN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jul 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rapid Micro Biosyst… (RPID) | 100 | 11.9 | -88.1% |
| Azenta, Inc. (AZTA) | 100 | 21.6 | -78.4% |
| Bruker Corporation (BRKR) | 100 | 53.7 | -46.3% |
| Qiagen N.V. (QGEN) | 100 | 59.0 | -41.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: RPID vs AZTA vs BRKR vs QGEN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
RPID is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 19.7%, EPS growth 2.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 25.2%
- 19.7% revenue growth vs BRKR's 2.1%
AZTA is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 130.4% 10Y total return vs BRKR's 68.7%
BRKR is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +9.5% vs AZTA's -30.6%
QGEN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.40, yield 0.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.40, Low D/E 43.8%, current ratio 3.90x
- Beta 0.40, yield 0.8%, current ratio 3.90x
- Lower P/E (13.5x vs 20.8x)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 19.7% revenue growth vs BRKR's 2.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (13.5x vs 20.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 20.3% margin vs RPID's -145.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.40 vs RPID's 1.91, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 0.8% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs BRKR's 0.3%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +9.5% vs AZTA's -30.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 7.0% ROA vs RPID's -51.6%, ROIC 8.6% vs -69.9% |
RPID vs AZTA vs BRKR vs QGEN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
RPID vs AZTA vs BRKR vs QGEN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
QGEN leads in 4 of 6 categories
RPID leads 0 • AZTA leads 0 • BRKR leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
QGEN leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BRKR is the larger business by revenue, generating $3.5B annually — 113.3x RPID's $31M. QGEN is the more profitable business, keeping 20.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to RPID's -145.1%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $31M | $597M | $3.5B | $2.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$42M | $41M | $397M | $714M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$44M | -$178M | -$12M | $425M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$39M | $29M | $51M | $453M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +18.4% | +44.6% | +45.3% | +61.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -148.8% | -2.6% | +4.9% | +24.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -145.1% | -29.9% | -0.3% | +20.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -126.4% | +4.8% | +1.5% | +21.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +3.1% | +1.0% | +2.7% | +3.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +3.8% | -3.0% | -79.2% | +26.8% |
Valuation Metrics
QGEN leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, QGEN's 10.7x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than BRKR's 18.6x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $117M | $885M | $6.7B | $6.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $121M | $717M | $8.5B | $7.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -2.50x | -15.75x | -294.40x | 16.20x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 36.96x | 20.84x | 13.47x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 0.36x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 14.35x | 18.55x | 10.68x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 3.49x | 1.49x | 1.96x | 3.26x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.54x | 0.51x | 2.67x | 1.82x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 23.10x | 155.25x | 15.02x |
Profitability & Efficiency
QGEN leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
QGEN delivers a 11.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $12 in annual profit, vs $-74 for RPID. AZTA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.06x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to BRKR's 0.81x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), QGEN scores 8/9 vs RPID's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -73.9% | -10.7% | -0.5% | +11.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -51.6% | -8.8% | -0.2% | +7.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -69.9% | -0.5% | +4.4% | +8.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -69.2% | -0.6% | +5.0% | +9.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 6 | 4 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.72x | 0.06x | 0.81x | 0.44x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $4M | -$169M | $1.7B | $815M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $20M | $280M | $299M | $839M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $24M | $111M | $2.0B | $1.7B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -107.47x | — | 1.14x | 15.74x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — RPID and BRKR each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in QGEN five years ago would be worth $7,690 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,229 for RPID. Over the past 12 months, BRKR leads with a +9.5% total return vs AZTA's -30.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors RPID at 46.9% vs AZTA's -24.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -16.2% | -42.4% | -8.1% | -21.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +7.3% | -30.6% | +9.5% | -15.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +216.9% | -57.7% | -42.0% | -21.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -87.7% | -78.2% | -34.1% | -23.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -87.7% | +130.4% | +68.7% | +63.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +46.9% | -24.9% | -16.6% | -7.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — BRKR and QGEN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
QGEN is the less volatile stock with a 0.40 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RPID's 1.91 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. BRKR currently trades 78.5% from its 52-week high vs AZTA's 46.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.91x | 1.91x | 1.66x | 0.40x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $4.94 | $41.73 | $56.22 | $57.82 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.01 | $17.11 | $28.53 | $32.92 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +53.2% | +46.1% | +78.5% | +57.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 53.9 | 32.0 | 67.8 | 26.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 205K | 1.0M | 1.9M | 1.9M |
Analyst Outlook
QGEN leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: RPID as "Buy", AZTA as "Buy", BRKR as "Buy", QGEN as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 204.2% upside for RPID (target: $8) vs 16.0% for BRKR (target: $51). For income investors, QGEN offers the higher dividend yield at 0.79% vs BRKR's 0.34%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $8.00 | $44.67 | $51.22 | $47.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 4 | 12 | 32 | 30 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.3% | +0.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $0.15 | $0.26 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.1% | 0.0% | +0.1% | +4.5% |
QGEN leads in 4 of 6 categories — strongest in Income & Cash Flow and Valuation Metrics. 2 categories are tied.
RPID vs AZTA vs BRKR vs QGEN: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is RPID or AZTA or BRKR or QGEN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Rapid Micro Biosystems, Inc.
(RPID) is the stronger pick with 19. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 2. 1% for Bruker Corporation (BRKR). Qiagen N. V. (QGEN) offers the better valuation at 16. 2x trailing P/E (13. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Rapid Micro Biosystems, Inc. (RPID) a "Buy" — based on 4 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 — RPID or AZTA or BRKR or QGEN?
On forward P/E, Qiagen N.
V. is actually cheaper at 13. 5x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — RPID or AZTA or BRKR or QGEN?
Over the past 5 years, Qiagen N.
V. (QGEN) delivered a total return of -23. 1%, compared to -87. 7% for Rapid Micro Biosystems, Inc. (RPID). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AZTA returned +130. 4% versus RPID's -87. 7%. 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 — RPID or AZTA or BRKR or QGEN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Qiagen N.
V. (QGEN) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 40β versus Rapid Micro Biosystems, Inc. 's 1. 91β — meaning RPID is approximately 373% more volatile than QGEN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Azenta, Inc. (AZTA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 6% versus 81% for Bruker Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — RPID or AZTA or BRKR or QGEN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Rapid Micro Biosystems, Inc.
(RPID) is pulling ahead at 19. 7% versus 2. 1% for Bruker Corporation (BRKR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Qiagen N. V. grew EPS 436. 8% year-over-year, compared to -119. 7% for Bruker Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, RPID leads at 25. 2% 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 — RPID or AZTA or BRKR or QGEN?
Qiagen N.
V. (QGEN) is the more profitable company, earning 20. 3% net margin versus -140. 3% for Rapid Micro Biosystems, Inc. — 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 -141. 1% for RPID. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — QGEN leads at 61. 8%, 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 RPID or AZTA or BRKR or QGEN more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Qiagen N.
V. (QGEN) trades at 13. 5x forward P/E versus 37. 0x for Azenta, Inc. — 23. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for RPID: 204. 2% to $8. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — RPID or AZTA or BRKR or QGEN?
In this comparison, QGEN (0.
8% yield), BRKR (0. 3% yield) pay a dividend. RPID, AZTA do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is RPID or AZTA or BRKR or QGEN better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Qiagen N.
V. (QGEN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 40), 0. 8% yield). Rapid Micro Biosystems, Inc. (RPID) carries a higher beta of 1. 91 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (QGEN: +63. 0%, RPID: -87. 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 RPID and AZTA and BRKR and QGEN?
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: RPID is a small-cap high-growth stock; AZTA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; BRKR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; QGEN is a small-cap deep-value stock. QGEN pays a dividend while RPID, AZTA, BRKR 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.