Medical - Devices
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
VERO vs SKIN vs ELF vs INMD
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Household & Personal Products
Household & Personal Products
Medical - Devices
VERO vs SKIN vs ELF vs INMD — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Devices | Household & Personal Products | Household & Personal Products | Medical - Devices |
| Market Cap | $499K | $75M | $3.39B | $884M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $59M | $296M | $1.52B | $375M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-55M | $-6M | $104M | $87M |
| Gross Margin | 64.4% | 64.9% | 70.3% | 77.8% |
| Operating Margin | -59.0% | -3.6% | 11.1% | 21.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 19.6x | 10.3x |
| Total Debt | $43M | $379M | $313M | $13M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $4M | $233M | $149M | $303M |
VERO vs SKIN vs ELF vs INMD — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Nov 20 | Apr 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Venus Concept Inc. (VERO) | 100 | 0.1 | -99.9% |
| The Beauty Health C… (SKIN) | 100 | 8.8 | -91.2% |
| e.l.f. Beauty, Inc. (ELF) | 100 | 278.8 | +178.8% |
| InMode Ltd. (INMD) | 100 | 63.5 | -36.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: VERO vs SKIN vs ELF vs INMD
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
VERO plays a supporting role in this comparison — it may shine differently against other peers.
SKIN lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
ELF is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 28.3%, EPS growth -13.1%, 3Y rev CAGR 49.6%
- 129.7% 10Y total return vs INMD's 105.6%
- PEG 0.48 vs INMD's 1.04
- 28.3% revenue growth vs VERO's -15.1%
INMD carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- beta 1.00
- Lower volatility, beta 1.00, Low D/E 1.9%, current ratio 9.88x
- Beta 1.00, current ratio 9.88x
- 23.3% margin vs VERO's -92.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 28.3% revenue growth vs VERO's -15.1% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 23.3% margin vs VERO's -92.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.00 vs ELF's 2.27, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | -1.9% vs VERO's -88.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 11.8% ROA vs VERO's -88.6%, ROIC 13.5% vs -39.8% |
VERO vs SKIN vs ELF vs INMD — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
VERO vs SKIN vs ELF vs INMD — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
INMD leads in 3 of 6 categories
ELF leads 1 • VERO leads 0 • SKIN leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
INMD leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ELF is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.5B annually — 25.8x VERO's $59M. INMD is the more profitable business, keeping 23.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to VERO's -92.8%. On growth, ELF holds the edge at +37.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $59M | $296M | $1.5B | $375M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$31M | $9M | $235M | $81M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$55M | -$6M | $104M | $87M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$21M | $29M | $215M | $91M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +64.4% | +64.9% | +70.3% | +77.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -59.0% | -3.6% | +11.1% | +21.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -92.8% | -2.0% | +6.8% | +23.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -35.2% | +9.7% | +14.1% | +24.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -8.2% | -6.7% | +37.8% | +5.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -8.5% | +38.0% | +116.7% | -30.8% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — VERO and SKIN and INMD each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 9.8x trailing earnings, INMD trades at a 69% valuation discount to ELF's 31.7x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ELF offers better value at 0.78x vs INMD's 0.98x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $498,989 | $75M | $3.4B | $884M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $39M | $221M | $3.6B | $595M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.00x | -3.63x | 31.70x | 9.76x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 19.60x | 10.32x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.78x | 0.98x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 48.65x | 17.59x | 6.91x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.01x | 0.25x | 2.58x | 2.39x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.07x | 1.29x | 4.67x | 1.34x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 2.02x | 29.41x | 10.49x |
Profitability & Efficiency
INMD leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
INMD delivers a 13.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $13 in annual profit, vs $-17 for VERO. INMD carries lower financial leverage with a 0.02x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to VERO's 15.16x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SKIN scores 7/9 vs INMD's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -17.4% | -9.4% | +8.9% | +13.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -88.6% | -1.2% | +4.5% | +11.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -39.8% | -6.8% | +13.5% | +13.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -54.2% | -4.5% | +16.6% | +12.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 3 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 15.16x | 6.20x | 0.41x | 0.02x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $39M | $146M | $164M | -$289M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $4M | $233M | $149M | $303M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $43M | $379M | $313M | $13M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -9.69x | 0.79x | 6.48x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
ELF leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ELF five years ago would be worth $20,957 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $9 for VERO. Over the past 12 months, INMD leads with a -1.9% total return vs VERO's -88.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ELF at -12.2% vs VERO's -79.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -82.3% | -58.6% | -21.8% | -5.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -88.9% | -53.2% | -10.4% | -1.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.1% | -94.7% | -32.4% | -60.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.9% | -95.3% | +109.6% | -61.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -94.6% | +129.7% | +105.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -79.4% | -62.5% | -12.2% | -26.4% |
Risk & Volatility
INMD leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
INMD is the less volatile stock with a 1.00 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ELF's 2.27 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. INMD currently trades 83.4% from its 52-week high vs VERO's 2.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.39x | 1.71x | 2.27x | 1.00x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $12.93 | $2.69 | $150.99 | $16.74 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.26 | $0.57 | $58.05 | $12.72 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +2.1% | +21.6% | +40.3% | +83.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 42.9 | 49.5 | 43.1 | 46.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 9K | 844K | 2.3M | 815K |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: SKIN as "Hold", ELF as "Buy", INMD as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 124.1% upside for SKIN (target: $1) vs 21.8% for INMD (target: $17).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $1.30 | $95.17 | $17.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 13 | 27 | 11 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 1 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +2.0% | +14.4% |
INMD leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). ELF leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
VERO vs SKIN vs ELF vs INMD: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is VERO or SKIN or ELF or INMD a better buy right now?
For growth investors, e.
l. f. Beauty, Inc. (ELF) is the stronger pick with 28. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -15. 1% for Venus Concept Inc. (VERO). InMode Ltd. (INMD) offers the better valuation at 9. 8x trailing P/E (10. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate e. l. f. Beauty, Inc. (ELF) a "Buy" — based on 27 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 — VERO or SKIN or ELF or INMD?
On trailing P/E, InMode Ltd.
(INMD) is the cheapest at 9. 8x versus e. l. f. Beauty, Inc. at 31. 7x. On forward P/E, InMode Ltd. is actually cheaper at 10. 3x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: e. l. f. Beauty, Inc. wins at 0. 48x versus InMode Ltd. 's 1. 04x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — VERO or SKIN or ELF or INMD?
Over the past 5 years, e.
l. f. Beauty, Inc. (ELF) delivered a total return of +109. 6%, compared to -99. 9% for Venus Concept Inc. (VERO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ELF returned +129. 7% versus VERO'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 — VERO or SKIN or ELF or INMD?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), InMode Ltd.
(INMD) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 00β versus e. l. f. Beauty, Inc. 's 2. 27β — meaning ELF is approximately 128% more volatile than INMD relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, InMode Ltd. (INMD) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 15% for Venus Concept Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — VERO or SKIN or ELF or INMD?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), e.
l. f. Beauty, Inc. (ELF) is pulling ahead at 28. 3% versus -15. 1% for Venus Concept Inc. (VERO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Beauty Health Company grew EPS 55. 6% year-over-year, compared to -869. 0% for Venus Concept Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ELF leads at 49. 6% 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 — VERO or SKIN or ELF or INMD?
InMode Ltd.
(INMD) is the more profitable company, earning 25. 3% net margin versus -72. 5% for Venus Concept Inc. — meaning it keeps 25. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: INMD leads at 23. 0% versus -41. 9% for VERO. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — INMD leads at 78. 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 VERO or SKIN or ELF or INMD 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, e. l. f. Beauty, Inc. (ELF) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 48x versus InMode Ltd. 's 1. 04x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, InMode Ltd. (INMD) trades at 10. 3x forward P/E versus 19. 6x for e. l. f. Beauty, Inc. — 9. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for SKIN: 124. 1% to $1. 30.
08Which pays a better dividend — VERO or SKIN or ELF or INMD?
None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.
All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.
09Is VERO or SKIN or ELF or INMD better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, InMode Ltd.
(INMD) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 00), +105. 6% 10Y return). e. l. f. Beauty, Inc. (ELF) carries a higher beta of 2. 27 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (INMD: +105. 6%, ELF: +129. 7%), 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 VERO and SKIN and ELF and INMD?
These companies operate in different sectors (VERO (Healthcare) and SKIN (Consumer Defensive) and ELF (Consumer Defensive) and INMD (Healthcare)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: VERO is a small-cap quality compounder stock; SKIN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ELF is a small-cap high-growth stock; INMD is a small-cap deep-value stock. 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.