Medical - Devices
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
TLSI vs CNMD vs NVCR vs ATRC vs ABT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Devices
Medical - Instruments & Supplies
Medical - Instruments & Supplies
Medical - Devices
TLSI vs CNMD vs NVCR vs ATRC vs ABT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Devices | Medical - Devices | Medical - Instruments & Supplies | Medical - Instruments & Supplies | Medical - Devices |
| Market Cap | $140M | $1.17B | $1.92B | $1.41B | $151.30B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $45M | $1.37B | $674M | $552M | $43.84B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-39M | $55M | $-173M | $-5M | $13.98B |
| Gross Margin | 84.6% | 53.6% | 75.2% | 75.5% | 54.0% |
| Operating Margin | -59.7% | 11.3% | -27.2% | -0.4% | 17.8% |
| Forward P/E | — | 8.4x | — | 428.7x | 15.4x |
| Total Debt | $34M | $835M | $290M | $88M | $15.28B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $20M | $41M | $103M | $167M | $7.62B |
TLSI vs CNMD vs NVCR vs ATRC vs ABT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Feb 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| TriSalus Life Scien… (TLSI) | 100 | 43.1 | -56.9% |
| CONMED Corporation (CNMD) | 100 | 29.9 | -70.1% |
| NovoCure Limited (NVCR) | 100 | 12.0 | -88.0% |
| AtriCure, Inc. (ATRC) | 100 | 40.3 | -59.7% |
| Abbott Laboratories (ABT) | 100 | 70.4 | -29.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TLSI vs CNMD vs NVCR vs ATRC vs ABT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TLSI is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 53.4%, EPS growth -47.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 53.9%
- 53.4% revenue growth vs ABT's 4.6%
CNMD ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.23 vs ABT's 0.51
- Lower P/E (8.4x vs 15.4x), PEG 0.23 vs 0.51
NVCR is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +1.1% vs ABT's -33.2%
ATRC is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.03, Low D/E 17.9%, current ratio 3.96x
ABT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 11 yrs, beta 0.25, yield 2.5%
- 173.7% 10Y total return vs ATRC's 95.1%
- Beta 0.25, yield 2.5%, current ratio 1.67x
- 31.9% margin vs TLSI's -86.9%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 53.4% revenue growth vs ABT's 4.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.4x vs 15.4x), PEG 0.23 vs 0.51 | |
| Quality / Margins | 31.9% margin vs TLSI's -86.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.25 vs NVCR's 2.20, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.5% yield, 11-year raise streak, vs CNMD's 2.1%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +1.1% vs ABT's -33.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 16.6% ROA vs TLSI's -110.7% |
TLSI vs CNMD vs NVCR vs ATRC vs ABT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
TLSI vs CNMD vs NVCR vs ATRC vs ABT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ABT leads in 4 of 6 categories
CNMD leads 1 • TLSI leads 0 • NVCR leads 0 • ATRC leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ABT leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ABT is the larger business by revenue, generating $43.8B annually — 971.0x TLSI's $45M. ABT is the more profitable business, keeping 31.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to TLSI's -86.9%. On growth, TLSI holds the edge at +59.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $45M | $1.4B | $674M | $552M | $43.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$26M | $219M | -$165M | $13M | $10.9B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$39M | $55M | -$173M | -$5M | $14.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$19M | $124M | -$48M | $54M | $6.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +84.6% | +53.6% | +75.2% | +75.5% | +54.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -59.7% | +11.3% | -27.2% | -0.4% | +17.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -86.9% | +4.0% | -25.7% | -0.8% | +31.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -41.9% | +9.0% | -7.1% | +9.7% | +15.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +59.8% | -0.7% | +12.3% | +14.3% | +6.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +48.8% | +136.8% | -100.0% | +101.6% | 0.0% |
Valuation Metrics
CNMD leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 11.4x trailing earnings, ABT trades at a 55% valuation discount to CNMD's 25.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ABT offers better value at 0.38x vs CNMD's 0.69x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $140M | $1.2B | $1.9B | $1.4B | $151.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $154M | $2.0B | $2.1B | $1.3B | $159.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -2.42x | 25.22x | -13.80x | -115.83x | 11.39x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 8.41x | — | 428.71x | 15.40x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.69x | — | — | 0.38x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 10.17x | — | 77.75x | 15.83x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 3.09x | 0.85x | 2.92x | 2.63x | 3.61x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 1.15x | 5.51x | 2.70x | 3.18x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 7.78x | — | 29.15x | 23.82x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ABT leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ABT delivers a 27.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $27 in annual profit, vs $-51 for NVCR. ATRC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.18x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NVCR's 0.85x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ABT scores 7/9 vs TLSI's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | +5.4% | -50.8% | -1.0% | +27.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -110.7% | +2.4% | -16.5% | -0.7% | +16.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | +5.8% | -16.4% | -0.6% | +9.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -143.4% | +7.0% | -28.9% | -0.6% | +10.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.81x | 0.85x | 0.18x | 0.32x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $14M | $794M | $187M | -$79M | $7.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $20M | $41M | $103M | $167M | $7.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $34M | $835M | $290M | $88M | $15.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -9.61x | 5.20x | -96.80x | 0.47x | 19.22x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
ABT leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ABT five years ago would be worth $8,209 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $875 for NVCR. Over the past 12 months, NVCR leads with a +1.1% total return vs ABT's -33.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ABT at -5.4% vs NVCR's -37.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -26.9% | -6.0% | +28.3% | -29.2% | -28.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -14.2% | -31.3% | +1.1% | -8.3% | -33.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -56.7% | -67.3% | -75.7% | -41.8% | -15.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -54.0% | -71.0% | -91.3% | -64.2% | -17.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -57.6% | +6.6% | +30.3% | +95.1% | +173.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -24.4% | -31.1% | -37.6% | -16.5% | -5.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — NVCR and ABT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ABT is the less volatile stock with a 0.25 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. NVCR currently trades 83.9% from its 52-week high vs TLSI's 56.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.36x | 1.32x | 2.15x | 0.95x | 0.22x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $7.95 | $61.08 | $20.06 | $43.18 | $139.06 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $3.42 | $33.21 | $9.82 | $26.62 | $86.15 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +56.1% | +62.4% | +83.9% | +64.4% | +62.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.2 | 49.6 | 69.8 | 45.0 | 22.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 167K | 406K | 1.5M | 669K | 10.5M |
Analyst Outlook
ABT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TLSI as "Buy", CNMD as "Hold", NVCR as "Buy", ATRC as "Buy", ABT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 135.4% upside for TLSI (target: $11) vs 47.9% for ABT (target: $129). For income investors, ABT offers the higher dividend yield at 2.52% vs CNMD's 2.09%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $10.50 | $78.00 | $33.50 | $51.33 | $128.71 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 21 | 15 | 19 | 41 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +2.1% | — | — | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 2 | — | — | 11 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.79 | — | — | $2.19 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.8% | +0.9% |
ABT leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). CNMD leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
TLSI vs CNMD vs NVCR vs ATRC vs ABT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TLSI or CNMD or NVCR or ATRC or ABT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, TriSalus Life Sciences, Inc.
(TLSI) is the stronger pick with 53. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 4. 6% for Abbott Laboratories (ABT). Abbott Laboratories (ABT) offers the better valuation at 11. 4x trailing P/E (15. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate TriSalus Life Sciences, Inc. (TLSI) a "Buy" — based on 2 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 — TLSI or CNMD or NVCR or ATRC or ABT?
On trailing P/E, Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the cheapest at 11.
4x versus CONMED Corporation at 25. 2x. On forward P/E, CONMED Corporation is actually cheaper at 8. 4x — 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: CONMED Corporation wins at 0. 23x versus Abbott Laboratories's 0. 51x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TLSI or CNMD or NVCR or ATRC or ABT?
Over the past 5 years, Abbott Laboratories (ABT) delivered a total return of -17.
9%, compared to -91. 3% for NovoCure Limited (NVCR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ABT returned +166. 6% versus TLSI's -57. 9%. 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 — TLSI or CNMD or NVCR or ATRC or ABT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
22β versus NovoCure Limited's 2. 15β — meaning NVCR is approximately 894% more volatile than ABT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, AtriCure, Inc. (ATRC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 18% versus 85% for NovoCure Limited — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TLSI or CNMD or NVCR or ATRC or ABT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), TriSalus Life Sciences, Inc.
(TLSI) is pulling ahead at 53. 4% versus 4. 6% for Abbott Laboratories (ABT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Abbott Laboratories grew EPS 133. 6% year-over-year, compared to -64. 6% for CONMED Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, TLSI leads at 53. 9% 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 — TLSI or CNMD or NVCR or ATRC or ABT?
Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the more profitable company, earning 31.
9% net margin versus -154. 3% for TriSalus Life Sciences, Inc. — meaning it keeps 31. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ABT leads at 16. 3% versus -59. 7% for TLSI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — TLSI leads at 84. 6%, 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 TLSI or CNMD or NVCR or ATRC 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, CONMED Corporation (CNMD) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 23x versus Abbott Laboratories's 0. 51x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, CONMED Corporation (CNMD) trades at 8. 4x forward P/E versus 428. 7x for AtriCure, Inc. — 420. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for TLSI: 135. 4% to $10. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — TLSI or CNMD or NVCR or ATRC or ABT?
In this comparison, ABT (2.
5% yield), CNMD (2. 1% yield) pay a dividend. TLSI, NVCR, ATRC do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is TLSI or CNMD or NVCR or ATRC 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 TLSI and CNMD and NVCR and ATRC 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: TLSI is a small-cap high-growth stock; CNMD is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NVCR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ATRC is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ABT is a mid-cap deep-value stock. CNMD, ABT pay a dividend while TLSI, NVCR, ATRC 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.