Medical - Instruments & Supplies
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
TFX vs NVCR vs INVA vs HOLX vs ABT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Instruments & Supplies
Biotechnology
Medical - Instruments & Supplies
Medical - Devices
TFX vs NVCR vs INVA vs HOLX vs ABT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Instruments & Supplies | Medical - Instruments & Supplies | Biotechnology | Medical - Instruments & Supplies | Medical - Devices |
| Market Cap | $5.83B | $1.92B | $1.93B | $16.97B | $151.30B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $2.81B | $674M | $424M | $4.13B | $43.84B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-1.01B | $-173M | $504M | $544M | $13.98B |
| Gross Margin | 53.3% | 75.2% | 76.2% | 52.8% | 54.0% |
| Operating Margin | 5.6% | -27.2% | 14.8% | 17.5% | 17.8% |
| Forward P/E | 19.9x | — | 7.3x | 17.2x | 15.4x |
| Total Debt | $2.73B | $290M | $269M | $2.63B | $15.28B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $393M | $103M | $551M | $1.96B | $7.62B |
TFX vs NVCR vs INVA vs HOLX vs ABT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Teleflex Incorporat… (TFX) | 100 | 36.7 | -63.3% |
| NovoCure Limited (NVCR) | 100 | 26.5 | -73.5% |
| Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) | 100 | 163.9 | +63.9% |
| Hologic, Inc. (HOLX) | 100 | 142.6 | +42.6% |
| Abbott Laboratories (ABT) | 100 | 88.8 | -11.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TFX vs NVCR vs INVA vs HOLX vs ABT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TFX lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Among these 5 stocks, NVCR doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
INVA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 18.5%, EPS growth 8.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 8.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.13, Low D/E 22.9%, current ratio 14.64x
- Beta 0.13, current ratio 14.64x
- 18.5% revenue growth vs TFX's -34.6%
HOLX is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if momentum is your priority.
- +37.1% vs ABT's -33.2%
ABT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 11 yrs, beta 0.25, yield 2.5%
- 173.7% 10Y total return vs HOLX's 124.3%
- PEG 0.51 vs INVA's 0.71
- 2.5% yield, 11-year raise streak, vs TFX's 1.0%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 18.5% revenue growth vs TFX's -34.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.3x vs 17.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 118.9% margin vs TFX's -35.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.13 vs NVCR's 2.20, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.5% yield, 11-year raise streak, vs TFX's 1.0%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +37.1% vs ABT's -33.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 32.4% ROA vs NVCR's -16.5%, ROIC 14.2% vs -16.4% |
TFX vs NVCR vs INVA vs HOLX vs ABT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
TFX vs NVCR vs INVA vs HOLX vs ABT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
INVA leads in 4 of 6 categories
ABT leads 1 • TFX leads 0 • NVCR leads 0 • HOLX leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
INVA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ABT is the larger business by revenue, generating $43.8B annually — 103.4x INVA's $424M. INVA is the more profitable business, keeping 118.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to TFX's -35.9%. On growth, NVCR holds the edge at +12.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $2.8B | $674M | $424M | $4.1B | $43.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $280M | -$165M | $86M | $974M | $10.9B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$1.0B | -$173M | $504M | $544M | $14.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $249M | -$48M | $181M | $1000M | $6.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +53.3% | +75.2% | +76.2% | +52.8% | +54.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +5.6% | -27.2% | +14.8% | +17.5% | +17.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -35.9% | -25.7% | +118.9% | +13.2% | +31.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +8.9% | -7.1% | +42.8% | +24.2% | +15.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -21.8% | +12.3% | +10.6% | +2.5% | +6.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -108.7% | -100.0% | +4.0% | -9.2% | 0.0% |
Valuation Metrics
INVA leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 6.9x trailing earnings, INVA trades at a 77% valuation discount to HOLX's 30.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ABT offers better value at 0.38x vs INVA's 0.67x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $5.8B | $1.9B | $1.9B | $17.0B | $151.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $8.2B | $2.1B | $1.7B | $17.6B | $159.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -6.50x | -13.80x | 6.91x | 30.53x | 11.39x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 19.93x | — | 7.31x | 17.21x | 15.40x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.67x | — | 0.38x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 18.82x | — | 8.10x | 17.39x | 15.83x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.93x | 2.92x | 4.55x | 4.14x | 3.61x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.88x | 5.51x | 1.65x | 3.43x | 3.18x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 23.75x | — | 9.88x | 18.44x | 23.82x |
Profitability & Efficiency
INVA leads this category, winning 8 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
INVA delivers a 46.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $46 in annual profit, vs $-51 for NVCR. INVA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.23x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to TFX's 0.87x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), HOLX scores 7/9 vs INVA's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -28.3% | -50.8% | +46.5% | +11.0% | +27.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -13.9% | -16.5% | +32.4% | +6.1% | +16.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +3.4% | -16.4% | +14.2% | +9.4% | +9.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +4.0% | -28.9% | +12.4% | +8.8% | +10.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.87x | 0.85x | 0.23x | 0.52x | 0.32x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $2.3B | $187M | -$282M | $667M | $7.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $393M | $103M | $551M | $2.0B | $7.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2.7B | $290M | $269M | $2.6B | $15.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -2.02x | -96.80x | 63.45x | 8.00x | 19.22x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
INVA leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in INVA five years ago would be worth $19,437 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $875 for NVCR. Over the past 12 months, HOLX leads with a +37.1% total return vs ABT's -33.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors INVA at 25.0% vs NVCR's -37.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +7.9% | +28.3% | +14.7% | +1.9% | -28.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +9.0% | +1.1% | +21.7% | +37.1% | -33.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -47.6% | -75.7% | +95.2% | -8.5% | -15.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -66.4% | -91.3% | +94.4% | +15.8% | -17.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -10.3% | +30.3% | +94.9% | +124.3% | +173.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -19.4% | -37.6% | +25.0% | -2.9% | -5.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — INVA and HOLX each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
INVA is the less volatile stock with a 0.13 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NVCR's 2.20 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. HOLX currently trades 100.0% from its 52-week high vs ABT's 62.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.03x | 2.15x | 0.11x | 0.45x | 0.22x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $139.63 | $20.06 | $25.15 | $76.04 | $139.06 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $100.18 | $9.82 | $16.52 | $52.81 | $86.15 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +94.3% | +83.9% | +90.7% | +100.0% | +62.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 48.5 | 69.8 | 39.9 | 69.1 | 22.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 884K | 1.5M | 621K | 10.0M | 10.5M |
Analyst Outlook
ABT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TFX as "Buy", NVCR as "Buy", INVA as "Buy", HOLX as "Hold", ABT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 99.0% upside for NVCR (target: $34) vs 3.9% for HOLX (target: $79). For income investors, ABT offers the higher dividend yield at 2.52% vs TFX's 1.02%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $140.50 | $33.50 | $40.00 | $79.00 | $128.71 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 29 | 15 | 10 | 42 | 41 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.0% | — | — | — | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | — | 0 | — | 11 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.35 | — | — | — | $2.19 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +5.1% | 0.0% | +0.2% | +4.4% | +0.9% |
INVA leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). ABT leads in 1 (Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
TFX vs NVCR vs INVA vs HOLX vs ABT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TFX or NVCR or INVA or HOLX or ABT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the stronger pick with 18. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -34. 6% for Teleflex Incorporated (TFX). Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) offers the better valuation at 6. 9x trailing P/E (7. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Teleflex Incorporated (TFX) a "Buy" — based on 29 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 — TFX or NVCR or INVA or HOLX or ABT?
On trailing P/E, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the cheapest at 6. 9x versus Hologic, Inc. at 30. 5x. On forward P/E, Innoviva, Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 3x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Abbott Laboratories wins at 0. 51x versus Innoviva, Inc. 's 0. 71x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TFX or NVCR or INVA or HOLX or ABT?
Over the past 5 years, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) delivered a total return of +94. 4%, compared to -91. 3% for NovoCure Limited (NVCR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ABT returned +166. 6% versus TFX's -9. 4%. 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 — TFX or NVCR or INVA or HOLX or ABT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 11β versus NovoCure Limited's 2. 15β — meaning NVCR is approximately 1787% more volatile than INVA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 23% versus 87% for Teleflex Incorporated — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TFX or NVCR or INVA or HOLX or ABT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is pulling ahead at 18. 5% versus -34. 6% for Teleflex Incorporated (TFX). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Innoviva, Inc. grew EPS 816. 7% year-over-year, compared to -1468. 2% for Teleflex Incorporated. Over a 3-year CAGR, INVA leads at 8. 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 — TFX or NVCR or INVA or HOLX or ABT?
Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the more profitable company, earning 63. 8% net margin versus -45. 4% for Teleflex Incorporated — meaning it keeps 63. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: INVA leads at 38. 5% versus -23. 5% for NVCR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NVCR leads at 74. 5%, 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 TFX or NVCR or INVA or HOLX or ABT 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, Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 51x versus Innoviva, Inc. 's 0. 71x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) trades at 7. 3x forward P/E versus 19. 9x for Teleflex Incorporated — 12. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for NVCR: 99. 0% to $33. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — TFX or NVCR or INVA or HOLX or ABT?
In this comparison, ABT (2.
5% yield), TFX (1. 0% yield) pay a dividend. NVCR, INVA, HOLX do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is TFX or NVCR or INVA or HOLX or ABT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
22), 2. 5% yield, +166. 6% 10Y return). NovoCure Limited (NVCR) carries a higher beta of 2. 15 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ABT: +166. 6%, NVCR: +38. 5%), 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 TFX and NVCR and INVA and HOLX and ABT?
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: TFX is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NVCR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; INVA is a small-cap high-growth stock; HOLX is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; ABT is a mid-cap deep-value stock. TFX, ABT pay a dividend while NVCR, INVA, HOLX 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.