Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
SEER vs PACB vs ILMN vs CDNA vs TMO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Devices
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
SEER vs PACB vs ILMN vs CDNA vs TMO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Medical - Devices | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| Market Cap | $105M | $498M | $21.07B | $1.11B | $176.36B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $16M | $160M | $4.39B | $413M | $45.20B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-79M | $-546M | $853M | $-8M | $6.86B |
| Gross Margin | 40.7% | 28.2% | 67.1% | 48.2% | 39.4% |
| Operating Margin | -5.2% | -346.1% | 20.9% | -3.3% | 17.8% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 26.8x | 22.8x | 19.1x |
| Total Debt | $26M | $759M | $2.55B | $20M | $40.85B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $41M | $64M | $1.42B | $65M | $9.86B |
SEER vs PACB vs ILMN vs CDNA vs TMO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Dec 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Seer, Inc. (SEER) | 100 | 3.3 | -96.7% |
| Pacific Biosciences… (PACB) | 100 | 6.4 | -93.6% |
| Illumina, Inc. (ILMN) | 100 | 38.6 | -61.4% |
| CareDx, Inc (CDNA) | 100 | 29.6 | -70.4% |
| Thermo Fisher Scien… (TMO) | 100 | 101.9 | +1.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SEER vs PACB vs ILMN vs CDNA vs TMO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SEER is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- beta 0.84
- Lower volatility, beta 0.84, Low D/E 7.9%, current ratio 16.53x
- Beta 0.84, current ratio 16.53x
- Beta 0.84 vs PACB's 2.43, lower leverage
Among these 5 stocks, PACB doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
ILMN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 6.33 vs TMO's 9.05
- Better valuation composite
- 19.4% margin vs SEER's -486.0%
- +81.7% vs SEER's +1.6%
CDNA ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth.
- 13.8% revenue growth vs SEER's -8.1%
TMO is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 3.9%, EPS growth 7.3%, 3Y rev CAGR -0.3%
- 229.1% 10Y total return vs CDNA's 385.1%
- 0.4% yield; 8-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 13.8% revenue growth vs SEER's -8.1% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 19.4% margin vs SEER's -486.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.84 vs PACB's 2.43, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 0.4% yield; 8-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +81.7% vs SEER's +1.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.4% ROA vs PACB's -66.8%, ROIC 16.8% vs -45.8% |
SEER vs PACB vs ILMN vs CDNA vs TMO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
SEER vs PACB vs ILMN vs CDNA vs TMO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ILMN leads in 2 of 6 categories
CDNA leads 1 • SEER leads 0 • PACB leads 0 • TMO leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ILMN leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TMO is the larger business by revenue, generating $45.2B annually — 2768.4x SEER's $16M. ILMN is the more profitable business, keeping 19.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to SEER's -4.9%. On growth, CDNA holds the edge at +39.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $16M | $160M | $4.4B | $413M | $45.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$76M | -$169M | $1.1B | $2M | $10.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$79M | -$546M | $853M | -$8M | $6.9B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$46M | -$124M | $989M | $65M | $6.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +40.7% | +28.2% | +67.1% | +48.2% | +39.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -5.2% | -3.5% | +20.9% | -3.3% | +17.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -4.9% | -3.4% | +19.4% | -2.0% | +15.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -2.8% | -77.4% | +22.5% | +15.8% | +14.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +4.5% | +13.8% | +4.8% | +39.0% | +6.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +8.6% | — | +6.1% | +126.3% | +11.3% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — ILMN and CDNA and TMO each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 25.5x trailing earnings, ILMN trades at a 5% valuation discount to TMO's 26.8x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ILMN offers better value at 6.01x vs TMO's 12.67x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $105M | $498M | $21.1B | $1.1B | $176.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $90M | $1.2B | $22.2B | $1.1B | $207.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -1.35x | -0.91x | 25.45x | -53.60x | 26.75x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 26.77x | 22.85x | 19.11x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 6.01x | — | 12.67x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 19.58x | — | 19.04x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 7.52x | 3.11x | 4.86x | 2.92x | 3.96x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.36x | 92.53x | 7.95x | 3.77x | 3.34x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 22.63x | 30.66x | 28.02x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ILMN leads this category, winning 6 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 $-11 for PACB. CDNA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.06x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PACB's 141.98x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ILMN scores 8/9 vs PACB's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -29.2% | -11.2% | +32.8% | -2.6% | +13.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -25.7% | -66.8% | +13.4% | -1.9% | +6.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -21.3% | -45.8% | +16.8% | -5.7% | +7.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -25.9% | -58.0% | +17.6% | -5.8% | +9.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 3 | 8 | 5 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.08x | 141.98x | 0.94x | 0.06x | 0.76x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$15M | $696M | $1.1B | -$46M | $31.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $41M | $64M | $1.4B | $65M | $9.9B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $26M | $759M | $2.6B | $20M | $40.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -77.95x | 12.09x | — | 5.89x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CDNA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in TMO five years ago would be worth $10,283 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $494 for SEER. Over the past 12 months, ILMN leads with a +81.7% total return vs SEER's +1.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CDNA at 37.7% vs PACB's -48.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +3.3% | -10.3% | +3.2% | +12.0% | -19.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +1.6% | +46.0% | +81.7% | +45.2% | +16.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -47.2% | -86.5% | -27.1% | +161.1% | -11.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -95.1% | -93.4% | -62.8% | -72.4% | +2.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -96.7% | -81.3% | +0.7% | +385.1% | +229.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -19.2% | -48.7% | -10.0% | +37.7% | -4.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — SEER and CDNA each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
SEER is the less volatile stock with a 0.84 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than PACB's 2.43 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CDNA currently trades 92.3% from its 52-week high vs PACB's 60.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.84x | 2.43x | 1.23x | 1.39x | 1.10x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $2.41 | $2.73 | $155.53 | $23.24 | $643.99 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.65 | $0.85 | $73.86 | $10.96 | $385.46 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +78.0% | +60.4% | +89.2% | +92.3% | +73.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 49.8 | 60.2 | 65.2 | 56.4 | 43.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 401K | 5.9M | 1.5M | 667K | 1.9M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: SEER as "Hold", PACB as "Buy", ILMN as "Buy", CDNA as "Buy", TMO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 38.0% upside for TMO (target: $655) vs -39.4% for PACB (target: $1). TMO is the only dividend payer here at 0.36% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $1.00 | $147.38 | $24.00 | $654.67 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 4 | 18 | 50 | 13 | 42 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | +0.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | — | 8 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | $1.69 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +11.3% | 0.0% | +3.5% | +7.9% | +1.7% |
ILMN leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). CDNA leads in 1 (Total Returns). 2 tied.
SEER vs PACB vs ILMN vs CDNA vs TMO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SEER or PACB or ILMN or CDNA or TMO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, CareDx, Inc (CDNA) is the stronger pick with 13.
8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -8. 1% for Seer, Inc. (SEER). Illumina, Inc. (ILMN) offers the better valuation at 25. 5x trailing P/E (26. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc. (PACB) a "Buy" — based on 18 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 — SEER or PACB or ILMN or CDNA or TMO?
On trailing P/E, Illumina, Inc.
(ILMN) is the cheapest at 25. 5x versus Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. at 26. 8x. On forward P/E, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. is actually cheaper at 19. 1x — 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: Illumina, Inc. wins at 6. 33x versus Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. 's 9. 05x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SEER or PACB or ILMN or CDNA or TMO?
Over the past 5 years, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.
(TMO) delivered a total return of +2. 8%, compared to -95. 1% for Seer, Inc. (SEER). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CDNA returned +385. 1% versus SEER's -96. 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 — SEER or PACB or ILMN or CDNA or TMO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Seer, Inc.
(SEER) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 84β versus Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc. 's 2. 43β — meaning PACB is approximately 189% more volatile than SEER relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, CareDx, Inc (CDNA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 6% versus 142% for Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SEER or PACB or ILMN or CDNA or TMO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), CareDx, Inc (CDNA) is pulling ahead at 13.
8% versus -8. 1% for Seer, Inc. (SEER). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Illumina, Inc. grew EPS 170. 9% year-over-year, compared to -143. 0% for CareDx, Inc. Over a 3-year CAGR, SEER leads at 29. 7% 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 — SEER or PACB or ILMN or CDNA or TMO?
Illumina, Inc.
(ILMN) is the more profitable company, earning 19. 6% net margin versus -620. 9% for Seer, Inc. — meaning it keeps 19. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ILMN leads at 19. 9% versus -717. 7% for SEER. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CDNA leads at 67. 0%, 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 SEER or PACB or ILMN or CDNA or TMO 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, Illumina, Inc. (ILMN) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 6. 33x versus Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. 's 9. 05x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. (TMO) trades at 19. 1x forward P/E versus 26. 8x for Illumina, Inc. — 7. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for TMO: 38. 0% to $654. 67.
08Which pays a better dividend — SEER or PACB or ILMN or CDNA or TMO?
In this comparison, TMO (0.
4% yield) pays a dividend. SEER, PACB, ILMN, CDNA do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is SEER or PACB or ILMN or CDNA or TMO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Seer, Inc.
(SEER) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 84)). Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc. (PACB) carries a higher beta of 2. 43 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (SEER: -96. 7%, PACB: -81. 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.
10What are the main differences between SEER and PACB and ILMN and CDNA and TMO?
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.
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.