Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
TMO vs ABT vs DHR vs IQV vs CRL
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Devices
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
TMO vs ABT vs DHR vs IQV vs CRL — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Devices | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| Market Cap | $176.36B | $151.30B | $124.33B | $30.32B | $8.98B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $45.20B | $43.84B | $24.78B | $16.63B | $4.03B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $6.86B | $13.98B | $3.69B | $1.39B | $-185M |
| Gross Margin | 39.4% | 54.0% | 60.7% | 26.1% | 24.9% |
| Operating Margin | 17.8% | 17.8% | 21.0% | 13.9% | 11.8% |
| Forward P/E | 19.1x | 15.9x | 20.8x | 14.1x | 16.4x |
| Total Debt | $40.85B | $15.28B | $18.42B | $16.17B | $3.07B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $9.86B | $7.62B | $4.62B | $1.98B | $214M |
TMO vs ABT vs DHR vs IQV vs CRL — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Thermo Fisher Scien… (TMO) | 100 | 135.9 | +35.9% |
| Abbott Laboratories (ABT) | 100 | 91.7 | -8.3% |
| Danaher Corporation (DHR) | 100 | 118.9 | +18.9% |
| IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) | 100 | 119.5 | +19.5% |
| Charles River Labor… (CRL) | 100 | 101.3 | +1.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TMO vs ABT vs DHR vs IQV vs CRL
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TMO is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 229.1% 10Y total return vs DHR's 219.3%
ABT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 11 yrs, beta 0.25, yield 2.5%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.25, Low D/E 31.9%, current ratio 1.67x
- Beta 0.25, yield 2.5%, current ratio 1.67x
- 31.9% margin vs CRL's -4.6%
Among these 5 stocks, DHR doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
IQV is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and valuation efficiency is your priority.
- Rev growth 5.9%, EPS growth 4.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 4.2%
- PEG 0.35 vs DHR's 34.35
- 5.9% revenue growth vs CRL's -0.9%
- Lower P/E (14.1x vs 16.4x)
CRL ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +32.8% vs ABT's -33.2%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 5.9% revenue growth vs CRL's -0.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.1x vs 16.4x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 31.9% margin vs CRL's -4.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.25 vs CRL's 1.52, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.5% yield, 11-year raise streak, vs TMO's 0.4%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +32.8% vs ABT's -33.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 16.6% ROA vs CRL's -2.5%, ROIC 9.9% vs 6.3% |
TMO vs ABT vs DHR vs IQV vs CRL — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
TMO vs ABT vs DHR vs IQV vs CRL — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ABT leads in 2 of 6 categories
DHR leads 1 • IQV leads 1 • CRL leads 1 • TMO leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
DHR leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TMO is the larger business by revenue, generating $45.2B annually — 11.2x CRL's $4.0B. ABT is the more profitable business, keeping 31.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CRL's -4.6%. On growth, IQV holds the edge at +8.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $45.2B | $43.8B | $24.8B | $16.6B | $4.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $10.5B | $10.9B | $7.2B | $3.5B | $757M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $6.9B | $14.0B | $3.7B | $1.4B | -$185M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $6.7B | $6.9B | $5.3B | $2.7B | $391M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +39.4% | +54.0% | +60.7% | +26.1% | +24.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +17.8% | +17.8% | +21.0% | +13.9% | +11.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +15.2% | +31.9% | +14.9% | +8.3% | -4.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +14.9% | +15.8% | +21.4% | +16.1% | +9.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +6.2% | +6.9% | +3.7% | +8.4% | +1.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +11.3% | 0.0% | +9.8% | +15.0% | -160.0% |
Valuation Metrics
IQV leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 11.4x trailing earnings, ABT trades at a 67% valuation discount to DHR's 34.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ABT offers better value at 0.38x vs DHR's 34.35x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $176.4B | $151.3B | $124.3B | $30.3B | $9.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $207.4B | $159.0B | $138.1B | $44.5B | $11.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 26.75x | 11.39x | 34.85x | 22.79x | -62.52x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 19.11x | 15.87x | 20.82x | 14.06x | 16.42x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 12.67x | 0.38x | 34.35x | 0.56x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 19.04x | 15.83x | 18.21x | 12.97x | 12.98x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 3.96x | 3.61x | 5.06x | 1.86x | 2.24x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.34x | 3.18x | 2.38x | 4.67x | 2.81x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 28.02x | 23.82x | 23.64x | 14.78x | 17.31x |
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 $-6 for CRL. ABT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.32x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to IQV's 2.44x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ABT scores 7/9 vs CRL's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +13.2% | +27.3% | +7.1% | +22.1% | -5.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +6.4% | +16.6% | +4.5% | +4.7% | -2.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.5% | +9.9% | +5.9% | +8.7% | +6.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +9.1% | +10.8% | +7.0% | +11.0% | +8.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 4 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.76x | 0.32x | 0.35x | 2.44x | 0.95x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $31.0B | $7.7B | $13.8B | $14.2B | $2.9B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $9.9B | $7.6B | $4.6B | $2.0B | $214M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $40.9B | $15.3B | $18.4B | $16.2B | $3.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 5.89x | 19.22x | 18.13x | 3.10x | 6.38x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CRL 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 $5,311 for CRL. Over the past 12 months, CRL leads with a +32.8% total return vs ABT's -33.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CRL at -1.4% vs DHR's -5.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -19.8% | -28.9% | -23.6% | -20.7% | -10.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +16.8% | -33.2% | -8.3% | +16.5% | +32.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -11.7% | -15.4% | -15.5% | -5.9% | -4.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +2.8% | -17.9% | -21.1% | -23.8% | -46.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +229.1% | +173.7% | +219.3% | +166.5% | +119.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -4.0% | -5.4% | -5.5% | -2.0% | -1.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ABT and CRL 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 CRL's 1.52 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CRL currently trades 79.5% 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 | 1.10x | 0.25x | 0.94x | 1.33x | 1.52x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $643.99 | $139.06 | $242.80 | $247.05 | $228.88 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $385.46 | $86.15 | $172.06 | $134.65 | $131.30 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +73.7% | +62.6% | +72.3% | +72.3% | +79.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 43.1 | 22.9 | 33.0 | 58.5 | 57.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.9M | 10.5M | 4.2M | 1.6M | 806K |
Analyst Outlook
ABT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TMO as "Buy", ABT as "Buy", DHR as "Buy", IQV as "Buy", CRL as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 47.9% upside for ABT (target: $129) vs 12.9% for CRL (target: $205). For income investors, ABT offers the higher dividend yield at 2.52% vs TMO's 0.36%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $654.67 | $128.71 | $247.00 | $225.63 | $205.43 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 42 | 41 | 42 | 44 | 36 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.4% | +2.5% | +0.7% | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 8 | 11 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.69 | $2.19 | $1.23 | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.7% | +0.9% | +2.5% | +4.1% | +4.0% |
ABT leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Analyst Outlook). DHR leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 1 tied.
TMO vs ABT vs DHR vs IQV vs CRL: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TMO or ABT or DHR or IQV or CRL a better buy right now?
For growth investors, IQVIA Holdings Inc.
(IQV) is the stronger pick with 5. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -0. 9% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. (CRL). Abbott Laboratories (ABT) offers the better valuation at 11. 4x trailing P/E (15. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. (TMO) a "Buy" — based on 42 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 — TMO or ABT or DHR or IQV or CRL?
On trailing P/E, Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the cheapest at 11.
4x versus Danaher Corporation at 34. 9x. On forward P/E, IQVIA Holdings Inc. is actually cheaper at 14. 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: IQVIA Holdings Inc. wins at 0. 35x versus Danaher Corporation's 34. 35x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TMO or ABT or DHR or IQV or CRL?
Over the past 5 years, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.
(TMO) delivered a total return of +2. 8%, compared to -46. 9% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. (CRL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: TMO returned +229. 1% versus CRL's +119. 2%. 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 — TMO or ABT or DHR or IQV or CRL?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
25β versus Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. 's 1. 52β — meaning CRL is approximately 512% more volatile than ABT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Abbott Laboratories (ABT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 32% versus 2% for IQVIA Holdings Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TMO or ABT or DHR or IQV or CRL?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), IQVIA Holdings Inc.
(IQV) is pulling ahead at 5. 9% versus -0. 9% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. (CRL). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Abbott Laboratories grew EPS 133. 6% year-over-year, compared to -1555. 0% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, IQV leads at 4. 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 — TMO or ABT or DHR or IQV or CRL?
Abbott Laboratories (ABT) is the more profitable company, earning 31.
9% net margin versus -3. 6% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. — meaning it keeps 31. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: DHR leads at 20. 9% versus 12. 6% for CRL. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — DHR leads at 60. 9%, 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 TMO or ABT or DHR or IQV or CRL 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, IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 35x versus Danaher Corporation's 34. 35x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) trades at 14. 1x forward P/E versus 20. 8x for Danaher Corporation — 6. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ABT: 47. 9% to $128. 71.
08Which pays a better dividend — TMO or ABT or DHR or IQV or CRL?
In this comparison, ABT (2.
5% yield), DHR (0. 7% yield), TMO (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. IQV, CRL do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is TMO or ABT or DHR or IQV or CRL 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.
25), 2. 5% yield, +173. 7% 10Y return). Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. (CRL) carries a higher beta of 1. 52 — 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: +173. 7%, CRL: +119. 2%), 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 TMO and ABT and DHR and IQV and CRL?
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: TMO is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; ABT is a mid-cap deep-value stock; DHR is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; IQV is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; CRL is a small-cap quality compounder stock. ABT, DHR pay a dividend while TMO, IQV, CRL 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.