Medical - Devices
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
SINT vs SYK vs ZBH vs MDT vs GMED
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Devices
Medical - Devices
Medical - Devices
Medical - Devices
SINT vs SYK vs ZBH vs MDT vs GMED — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Devices | Medical - Devices | Medical - Devices | Medical - Devices | Medical - Devices |
| Market Cap | $9M | $112.69B | $16.32B | $99.94B | $11.51B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1M | $25.12B | $8.41B | $35.48B | $3.10B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-17M | $3.25B | $761M | $4.61B | $587M |
| Gross Margin | 50.0% | 63.5% | 70.0% | 61.9% | 50.9% |
| Operating Margin | -8.3% | 22.4% | 15.6% | 17.9% | 17.2% |
| Forward P/E | — | 19.6x | 9.8x | 14.1x | 19.0x |
| Total Debt | $3M | $14.86B | $7.52B | $28.52B | $119M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $4M | $4.01B | $592M | $2.22B | $526M |
SINT vs SYK vs ZBH vs MDT vs GMED — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sintx Technologies,… (SINT) | 100 | 0.0 | -100.0% |
| Stryker Corporation (SYK) | 100 | 145.8 | +45.8% |
| Zimmer Biomet Holdi… (ZBH) | 100 | 67.2 | -32.8% |
| Medtronic plc (MDT) | 100 | 77.2 | -22.8% |
| Globus Medical, Inc. (GMED) | 100 | 142.6 | +42.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SINT vs SYK vs ZBH vs MDT vs GMED
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SINT lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Among these 5 stocks, SYK doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
ZBH ranks third and is worth considering specifically for value.
- Lower P/E (9.8x vs 14.1x)
MDT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 36 yrs, beta 0.47, yield 3.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.47, Low D/E 59.1%, current ratio 1.85x
- Beta 0.47, yield 3.6%, current ratio 1.85x
- Beta 0.47 vs SINT's 1.95, lower leverage
GMED is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 16.7%, EPS growth 422.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 42.2%
- 264.4% 10Y total return vs SYK's 187.1%
- PEG 0.61 vs MDT's 36.00
- 16.7% revenue growth vs SINT's -18.3%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 16.7% revenue growth vs SINT's -18.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (9.8x vs 14.1x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 18.9% margin vs SINT's -13.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.47 vs SINT's 1.95, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.6% yield, 36-year raise streak, vs SYK's 1.1%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +19.0% vs SYK's -22.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 175.8% ROA vs SINT's -159.9%, ROIC 6.0% vs -253.2% |
SINT vs SYK vs ZBH vs MDT vs GMED — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
SINT vs SYK vs ZBH vs MDT vs GMED — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
GMED leads in 3 of 6 categories
ZBH leads 1 • MDT leads 1 • SINT leads 0 • SYK leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
GMED leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MDT is the larger business by revenue, generating $35.5B annually — 29109.1x SINT's $1M. GMED is the more profitable business, keeping 18.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to SINT's -13.6%. On growth, GMED holds the edge at +27.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1M | $25.1B | $8.4B | $35.5B | $3.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$9M | $6.3B | $2.3B | $9.4B | $745M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$17M | $3.2B | $761M | $4.6B | $587M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$8M | $4.3B | $1.8B | $5.4B | $605M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +50.0% | +63.5% | +70.0% | +61.9% | +50.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -8.3% | +22.4% | +15.6% | +17.9% | +17.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -13.6% | +12.9% | +9.1% | +13.0% | +18.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -6.3% | +17.1% | +21.8% | +15.2% | +19.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -43.3% | +11.4% | +9.3% | +8.8% | +27.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +50.2% | +56.0% | +34.1% | -11.9% | +66.7% |
Valuation Metrics
ZBH leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 21.6x trailing earnings, MDT trades at a 38% valuation discount to SYK's 35.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), GMED offers better value at 0.70x vs MDT's 36.00x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $9M | $112.7B | $16.3B | $99.9B | $11.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $8M | $123.5B | $23.3B | $126.2B | $11.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.39x | 35.03x | 23.48x | 21.60x | 21.70x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 19.62x | 9.83x | 14.13x | 19.03x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.36x | — | 36.00x | 0.70x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 20.31x | 9.47x | 14.32x | 18.51x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 8.49x | 4.49x | 1.98x | 2.98x | 3.92x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.26x | 5.02x | 1.30x | 2.08x | 2.55x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 26.31x | 11.09x | 19.28x | 19.54x |
Profitability & Efficiency
GMED leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
SYK delivers a 15.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $15 in annual profit, vs $-4 for SINT. GMED carries lower financial leverage with a 0.03x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to SINT's 1.11x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), GMED scores 9/9 vs SINT's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -3.7% | +15.0% | +5.8% | +9.4% | +13.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -159.9% | +6.9% | +3.3% | +175.8% | +11.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -2.5% | +11.4% | +5.4% | +6.0% | +8.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -162.4% | +13.0% | +6.9% | +7.5% | +10.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 9 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.11x | 0.66x | 0.59x | 0.59x | 0.03x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$898,000 | $10.8B | $6.9B | $26.3B | -$408M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $4M | $4.0B | $592M | $2.2B | $526M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $3M | $14.9B | $7.5B | $28.5B | $119M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -181.30x | 6.72x | 4.08x | 9.08x | 81.13x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
GMED leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in SYK five years ago would be worth $12,152 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1 for SINT. Over the past 12 months, GMED leads with a +19.0% total return vs SYK's -22.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GMED at 13.5% vs SINT's -79.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -36.8% | -15.2% | -7.1% | -18.1% | -2.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -4.4% | -22.5% | -10.4% | -2.8% | +19.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.2% | +5.5% | -37.2% | -4.2% | +46.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | +21.5% | -47.3% | -27.7% | +16.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | +187.1% | -17.8% | +26.5% | +264.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -79.9% | +1.8% | -14.4% | -1.4% | +13.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MDT and GMED each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MDT is the less volatile stock with a 0.47 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than SINT's 1.95 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. GMED currently trades 83.9% from its 52-week high vs SINT's 35.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.94x | 0.52x | 0.60x | 0.42x | 1.23x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $6.78 | $404.87 | $108.29 | $106.33 | $101.40 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.99 | $289.91 | $79.83 | $77.16 | $51.79 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +35.3% | +72.7% | +77.0% | +73.3% | +83.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 46.1 | 24.3 | 34.3 | 27.3 | 45.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 37K | 2.1M | 2.2M | 7.8M | 998K |
Analyst Outlook
MDT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: SYK as "Buy", ZBH as "Hold", MDT as "Buy", GMED as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 40.5% upside for MDT (target: $110) vs 17.4% for ZBH (target: $98). For income investors, MDT offers the higher dividend yield at 3.57% vs SYK's 1.14%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $403.69 | $97.90 | $109.50 | $110.67 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 50 | 42 | 49 | 36 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.1% | +1.1% | +3.6% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 34 | 0 | 36 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $3.36 | $0.96 | $2.78 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.5% | 0.0% | +3.0% | +3.2% | +2.6% |
GMED leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). ZBH leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
SINT vs SYK vs ZBH vs MDT vs GMED: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SINT or SYK or ZBH or MDT or GMED a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Globus Medical, Inc.
(GMED) is the stronger pick with 16. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -18. 3% for Sintx Technologies, Inc. (SINT). Medtronic plc (MDT) offers the better valuation at 21. 6x trailing P/E (14. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Stryker Corporation (SYK) 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 — SINT or SYK or ZBH or MDT or GMED?
On trailing P/E, Medtronic plc (MDT) is the cheapest at 21.
6x versus Stryker Corporation at 35. 0x. On forward P/E, Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc. is actually cheaper at 9. 8x — 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: Globus Medical, Inc. wins at 0. 61x versus Medtronic plc's 36. 00x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SINT or SYK or ZBH or MDT or GMED?
Over the past 5 years, Stryker Corporation (SYK) delivered a total return of +21.
5%, compared to -100. 0% for Sintx Technologies, Inc. (SINT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GMED returned +233. 8% versus SINT's -100. 0%. 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 — SINT or SYK or ZBH or MDT or GMED?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Medtronic plc (MDT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
42β versus Sintx Technologies, Inc. 's 1. 94β — meaning SINT is approximately 357% more volatile than MDT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Globus Medical, Inc. (GMED) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 3% versus 111% for Sintx Technologies, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SINT or SYK or ZBH or MDT or GMED?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Globus Medical, Inc.
(GMED) is pulling ahead at 16. 7% versus -18. 3% for Sintx Technologies, Inc. (SINT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Globus Medical, Inc. grew EPS 422. 7% year-over-year, compared to -19. 9% for Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, GMED leads at 42. 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 — SINT or SYK or ZBH or MDT or GMED?
Globus Medical, Inc.
(GMED) is the more profitable company, earning 18. 3% net margin versus -1678. 1% for Sintx Technologies, Inc. — meaning it keeps 18. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: SYK leads at 19. 5% versus -1053. 1% for SINT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — GMED leads at 67. 4%, 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 SINT or SYK or ZBH or MDT or GMED 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, Globus Medical, Inc. (GMED) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 61x versus Medtronic plc's 36. 00x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc. (ZBH) trades at 9. 8x forward P/E versus 19. 6x for Stryker Corporation — 9. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MDT: 40. 5% to $109. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — SINT or SYK or ZBH or MDT or GMED?
In this comparison, MDT (3.
6% yield), ZBH (1. 1% yield), SYK (1. 1% yield) pay a dividend. SINT, GMED do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is SINT or SYK or ZBH or MDT or GMED better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Stryker Corporation (SYK) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
52), 1. 1% yield, +179. 2% 10Y return). Sintx Technologies, Inc. (SINT) carries a higher beta of 1. 94 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (SYK: +179. 2%, SINT: -100. 0%), 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 SINT and SYK and ZBH and MDT and GMED?
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: SINT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; SYK is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; ZBH is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; MDT is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; GMED is a mid-cap high-growth stock. SYK, ZBH, MDT pay a dividend while SINT, GMED 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.