Industrial - Distribution
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
TRNS vs TMO vs DHR vs A vs WAT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
TRNS vs TMO vs DHR vs A vs WAT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Industrial - Distribution | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| Market Cap | $852M | $174.42B | $127.47B | $36.67B | $23.17B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $333M | $45.20B | $24.78B | $7.23B | $3.77B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $7M | $6.86B | $3.69B | $1.41B | $449M |
| Gross Margin | 32.6% | 39.4% | 60.7% | 53.0% | 55.0% |
| Operating Margin | 4.1% | 17.8% | 21.0% | 21.5% | 17.1% |
| Forward P/E | 51.9x | 18.9x | 21.3x | 21.4x | 24.5x |
| Total Debt | $129M | $40.85B | $18.42B | $3.35B | $1.41B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $5M | $9.86B | $4.62B | $1.79B | $588M |
TRNS vs TMO vs DHR vs A vs WAT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Transcat, Inc. (TRNS) | 100 | 352.9 | +252.9% |
| Thermo Fisher Scien… (TMO) | 100 | 129.5 | +29.5% |
| Danaher Corporation (DHR) | 100 | 114.9 | +14.9% |
| Agilent Technologie… (A) | 100 | 146.9 | +46.9% |
| Waters Corporation (WAT) | 100 | 197.1 | +97.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TRNS vs TMO vs DHR vs A vs WAT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TRNS has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 19.2%, EPS growth -63.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 12.9%
- 7.7% 10Y total return vs TMO's 219.0%
- 19.2% revenue growth vs DHR's 2.9%
- +17.9% vs DHR's -11.5%
TMO is the clearest fit if your priority is value.
- Lower P/E (18.9x vs 24.5x)
DHR is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Dividend streak 9 yrs, beta 0.70, yield 0.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.70, Low D/E 35.1%, current ratio 1.87x
- Beta 0.70 vs TRNS's 1.35, lower leverage
- 0.7% yield, 9-year raise streak, vs A's 0.8%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
A ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency and defensive.
- PEG 1.46 vs DHR's 35.21
- Beta 1.06, yield 0.8%, current ratio 1.96x
- 19.6% margin vs TRNS's 2.0%
- 11.1% ROA vs TRNS's 1.4%, ROIC 13.5% vs 2.6%
Among these 5 stocks, WAT doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 19.2% revenue growth vs DHR's 2.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (18.9x vs 24.5x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 19.6% margin vs TRNS's 2.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.70 vs TRNS's 1.35, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 0.7% yield, 9-year raise streak, vs A's 0.8%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +17.9% vs DHR's -11.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 11.1% ROA vs TRNS's 1.4%, ROIC 13.5% vs 2.6% |
TRNS vs TMO vs DHR vs A vs WAT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
TRNS vs TMO vs DHR vs A vs WAT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
DHR leads in 2 of 6 categories
A leads 1 • TRNS leads 1 • TMO leads 0 • WAT leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
A 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 — 135.9x TRNS's $333M. A is the more profitable business, keeping 19.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to TRNS's 2.0%. On growth, WAT holds the edge at +91.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $333M | $45.2B | $24.8B | $7.2B | $3.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $40M | $10.5B | $7.2B | $1.8B | $953M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $7M | $6.9B | $3.7B | $1.4B | $449M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $20M | $6.7B | $5.3B | $1.3B | $264M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +32.6% | +39.4% | +60.7% | +53.0% | +55.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +4.1% | +17.8% | +21.0% | +21.5% | +17.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +2.0% | +15.2% | +14.9% | +19.6% | +11.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +5.9% | +14.9% | +21.4% | +17.4% | +7.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +15.8% | +6.2% | +3.7% | +10.0% | +91.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -56.3% | +11.3% | +9.8% | +60.0% | -142.9% |
Valuation Metrics
DHR leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 26.5x trailing earnings, TMO trades at a 83% valuation discount to TRNS's 160.1x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), A offers better value at 1.93x vs DHR's 35.21x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $852M | $174.4B | $127.5B | $36.7B | $23.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $976M | $205.4B | $141.3B | $38.2B | $24.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 160.11x | 26.46x | 35.73x | 28.41x | 33.04x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 51.85x | 18.88x | 21.34x | 21.43x | 24.49x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 12.53x | 35.21x | 1.93x | 6.38x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 24.76x | 18.86x | 18.63x | 21.64x | 21.82x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.57x | 3.91x | 5.19x | 5.28x | 7.32x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.83x | 3.31x | 2.44x | 5.47x | 8.29x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 43.60x | 27.72x | 24.23x | 31.83x | 42.93x |
Profitability & Efficiency
DHR leads this category, winning 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
A delivers a 20.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $21 in annual profit, vs $2 for TRNS. DHR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.35x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to TMO's 0.76x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), DHR scores 7/9 vs WAT's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +2.2% | +13.2% | +7.1% | +20.8% | +8.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.4% | +6.4% | +4.5% | +11.1% | +4.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +2.6% | +7.5% | +5.9% | +13.5% | +20.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +3.3% | +9.1% | +7.0% | +14.5% | +18.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.43x | 0.76x | 0.35x | 0.50x | 0.55x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $124M | $31.0B | $13.8B | $1.6B | $820M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $5M | $9.9B | $4.6B | $1.8B | $588M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $129M | $40.9B | $18.4B | $3.4B | $1.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 2.81x | 5.89x | 18.13x | 15.72x | 6.72x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
TRNS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in TRNS five years ago would be worth $16,632 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,449 for DHR. Over the past 12 months, TRNS leads with a +17.9% total return vs DHR's -11.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors WAT at 11.4% vs DHR's -4.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +59.7% | -20.7% | -21.7% | -5.5% | -6.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +17.9% | +13.4% | -11.5% | +10.0% | +1.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -1.0% | -9.5% | -13.0% | +12.0% | +38.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +66.3% | +1.4% | -15.5% | -6.9% | +5.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +769.1% | +219.0% | +222.6% | +206.2% | +162.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -0.3% | -3.3% | -4.5% | +3.8% | +11.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — TRNS and DHR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
DHR is the less volatile stock with a 0.70 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than TRNS's 1.35 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. TRNS currently trades 96.3% from its 52-week high vs TMO's 72.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.35x | 0.91x | 0.70x | 1.06x | 0.94x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $94.76 | $643.99 | $242.80 | $160.27 | $414.15 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $50.23 | $385.46 | $160.93 | $108.35 | $275.05 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +96.3% | +72.9% | +74.2% | +81.0% | +85.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 62.7 | 50.8 | 52.0 | 56.1 | 53.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 155K | 2.0M | 4.2M | 1.9M | 891K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — DHR and A each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TRNS as "Buy", TMO as "Buy", DHR as "Buy", A as "Buy", WAT as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 35.4% upside for TRNS (target: $124) vs 11.8% for WAT (target: $397). For income investors, A offers the higher dividend yield at 0.76% vs TMO's 0.36%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $123.60 | $599.70 | $231.80 | $154.75 | $397.44 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 10 | 42 | 43 | 40 | 35 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.4% | +0.7% | +0.8% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 8 | 9 | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.69 | $1.23 | $0.99 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.1% | +1.7% | +2.4% | +1.2% | +0.1% |
DHR leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). A leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.
TRNS vs TMO vs DHR vs A vs WAT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TRNS or TMO or DHR or A or WAT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Transcat, Inc.
(TRNS) is the stronger pick with 19. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 2. 9% for Danaher Corporation (DHR). Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. (TMO) offers the better valuation at 26. 5x trailing P/E (18. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Transcat, Inc. (TRNS) a "Buy" — based on 10 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 — TRNS or TMO or DHR or A or WAT?
On trailing P/E, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.
(TMO) is the cheapest at 26. 5x versus Transcat, Inc. at 160. 1x. On forward P/E, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. is actually cheaper at 18. 9x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Agilent Technologies, Inc. wins at 1. 46x versus Danaher Corporation's 35. 21x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TRNS or TMO or DHR or A or WAT?
Over the past 5 years, Transcat, Inc.
(TRNS) delivered a total return of +66. 3%, compared to -15. 5% for Danaher Corporation (DHR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: TRNS returned +769. 1% versus WAT's +162. 1%. 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 — TRNS or TMO or DHR or A or WAT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Danaher Corporation (DHR) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
70β versus Transcat, Inc. 's 1. 35β — meaning TRNS is approximately 92% more volatile than DHR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Danaher Corporation (DHR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 35% versus 76% for Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TRNS or TMO or DHR or A or WAT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Transcat, Inc.
(TRNS) is pulling ahead at 19. 2% versus 2. 9% for Danaher Corporation (DHR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. grew EPS 7. 3% year-over-year, compared to -63. 7% for Transcat, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, TRNS leads at 12. 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 — TRNS or TMO or DHR or A or WAT?
Waters Corporation (WAT) is the more profitable company, earning 20.
3% net margin versus 1. 6% for Transcat, Inc. — meaning it keeps 20. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: WAT leads at 28. 2% versus 4. 0% for TRNS. 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 TRNS or TMO or DHR or A or WAT 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, Agilent Technologies, Inc. (A) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 46x versus Danaher Corporation's 35. 21x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. (TMO) trades at 18. 9x forward P/E versus 51. 9x for Transcat, Inc. — 33. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for TRNS: 35. 4% to $123. 60.
08Which pays a better dividend — TRNS or TMO or DHR or A or WAT?
In this comparison, A (0.
8% yield), DHR (0. 7% yield), TMO (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. TRNS, WAT do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is TRNS or TMO or DHR or A or WAT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Danaher Corporation (DHR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
70), 0. 7% yield, +222. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (DHR: +222. 6%, WAT: +162. 1%), 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 TRNS and TMO and DHR and A and WAT?
These companies operate in different sectors (TRNS (Industrials) and TMO (Healthcare) and DHR (Healthcare) and A (Healthcare) and WAT (Healthcare)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: TRNS is a small-cap high-growth stock; TMO is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; DHR is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; A is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; WAT is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. DHR, A pay a dividend while TRNS, TMO, WAT 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.