Medical - Instruments & Supplies
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
ZJYL vs LFUS vs MPWR vs CTS vs TXN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Semiconductors
Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Semiconductors
ZJYL vs LFUS vs MPWR vs CTS vs TXN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Instruments & Supplies | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Semiconductors | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Semiconductors |
| Market Cap | $344M | $11.11B | $77.41B | $1.71B | $259.70B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $43M | $2.49B | $2.79B | $556M | $18.44B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $5M | $-40M | $616M | $69M | $5.37B |
| Gross Margin | 35.8% | 38.3% | 55.2% | 38.7% | 57.3% |
| Operating Margin | 10.0% | 2.8% | 26.1% | 15.9% | 35.3% |
| Forward P/E | 93.6x | 31.6x | 67.2x | 25.4x | 38.1x |
| Total Debt | $12M | $946M | $24M | $122M | $15.39B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $8M | $563M | $1.10B | $82M | $3.23B |
ZJYL vs LFUS vs MPWR vs CTS vs TXN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 23 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jin Medical Interna… (ZJYL) | 100 | 28.5 | -71.5% |
| Littelfuse, Inc. (LFUS) | 100 | 170.5 | +70.5% |
| Monolithic Power Sy… (MPWR) | 100 | 319.8 | +219.8% |
| CTS Corporation (CTS) | 100 | 124.8 | +24.8% |
| Texas Instruments I… (TXN) | 100 | 154.8 | +54.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ZJYL vs LFUS vs MPWR vs CTS vs TXN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ZJYL is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 18.6%, EPS growth 18.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 4.2%
Among these 5 stocks, LFUS doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
MPWR is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 24.9% 10Y total return vs TXN's 471.6%
- 26.4% revenue growth vs CTS's 5.2%
- +148.6% vs ZJYL's -86.4%
CTS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 1.63 vs ZJYL's 4.48
- Lower P/E (25.4x vs 38.1x)
TXN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 22 yrs, beta 1.11, yield 1.9%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.11, Low D/E 94.6%, current ratio 4.35x
- Beta 1.11, yield 1.9%, current ratio 4.35x
- 29.1% margin vs LFUS's -1.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 26.4% revenue growth vs CTS's 5.2% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (25.4x vs 38.1x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 29.1% margin vs LFUS's -1.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.11 vs MPWR's 2.28 | |
| Dividends | 1.9% yield, 22-year raise streak, vs MPWR's 0.4%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +148.6% vs ZJYL's -86.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 15.5% ROA vs LFUS's -1.0%, ROIC 15.8% vs 1.0% |
ZJYL vs LFUS vs MPWR vs CTS vs TXN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
ZJYL vs LFUS vs MPWR vs CTS vs TXN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
TXN leads in 2 of 6 categories
MPWR leads 2 • CTS leads 1 • ZJYL leads 0 • LFUS leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TXN leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TXN is the larger business by revenue, generating $18.4B annually — 429.3x ZJYL's $43M. TXN is the more profitable business, keeping 29.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LFUS's -1.6%. On growth, MPWR holds the edge at +20.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $43M | $2.5B | $2.8B | $556M | $18.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $5M | $227M | $781M | $123M | $8.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $5M | -$40M | $616M | $69M | $5.4B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$581,373 | $390M | $664M | $88M | $3.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +35.8% | +38.3% | +55.2% | +38.7% | +57.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +10.0% | +2.8% | +26.1% | +15.9% | +35.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +10.9% | -1.6% | +22.1% | +12.4% | +29.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -1.4% | +15.7% | +23.8% | +15.8% | +20.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -6.4% | +18.5% | +20.8% | +10.9% | +18.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -105.3% | +69.1% | -88.4% | +34.1% | +32.0% |
Valuation Metrics
CTS leads this category, winning 6 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 27.3x trailing earnings, CTS trades at a 78% valuation discount to MPWR's 123.6x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), CTS offers better value at 1.75x vs ZJYL's 4.48x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $344M | $11.1B | $77.4B | $1.7B | $259.7B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $348M | $11.5B | $76.3B | $1.8B | $271.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 93.62x | -152.27x | 123.60x | 27.33x | 52.34x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 31.59x | 67.24x | 25.41x | 38.12x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 4.48x | — | 4.19x | 1.75x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 87.30x | 83.21x | 97.90x | 14.68x | 33.89x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 14.65x | 4.66x | 27.74x | 3.16x | 14.69x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 12.06x | 4.53x | 21.56x | 3.23x | 16.00x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 30.35x | 116.20x | 19.82x | 99.77x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MPWR leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
TXN delivers a 32.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $32 in annual profit, vs $-2 for LFUS. MPWR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to TXN's 0.95x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CTS scores 7/9 vs ZJYL's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +16.9% | -1.6% | +17.9% | +12.5% | +32.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +9.7% | -1.0% | +15.2% | +8.9% | +15.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +10.3% | +1.0% | +22.2% | +11.1% | +15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +13.8% | +1.1% | +20.4% | +12.8% | +19.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.41x | 0.39x | 0.01x | 0.22x | 0.95x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $3M | $383M | -$1.1B | $40M | $12.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $8M | $563M | $1.1B | $82M | $3.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $12M | $946M | $24M | $122M | $15.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 20.63x | -0.93x | — | 18.18x | 12.06x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MPWR leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MPWR five years ago would be worth $46,617 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,767 for ZJYL. Over the past 12 months, MPWR leads with a +148.6% total return vs ZJYL's -86.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MPWR at 56.1% vs ZJYL's -26.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -51.1% | +68.5% | +68.5% | +36.6% | +62.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -86.4% | +132.6% | +148.6% | +53.2% | +76.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -60.7% | +73.3% | +280.3% | +44.5% | +83.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -72.3% | +71.8% | +366.2% | +83.2% | +65.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -72.3% | +317.6% | +2494.7% | +253.2% | +471.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -26.8% | +20.1% | +56.1% | +13.1% | +22.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CTS and TXN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TXN is the less volatile stock with a 1.11 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MPWR's 2.28 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CTS currently trades 98.4% from its 52-week high vs ZJYL's 12.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.56x | 1.77x | 2.27x | 1.46x | 1.09x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $18.00 | $475.00 | $1662.00 | $60.81 | $292.64 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.12 | $188.08 | $613.00 | $36.03 | $152.73 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +12.2% | +93.0% | +94.8% | +98.4% | +97.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 53.7 | 76.2 | 71.0 | 71.0 | 79.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 22K | 265K | 577K | 209K | 6.7M |
Analyst Outlook
TXN leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LFUS as "Buy", MPWR as "Buy", CTS as "Hold", TXN as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 2.5% upside for MPWR (target: $1615) vs -11.1% for TXN (target: $254). For income investors, TXN offers the higher dividend yield at 1.92% vs CTS's 0.27%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $435.00 | $1615.00 | — | $253.71 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 12 | 25 | 4 | 65 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.7% | +0.4% | +0.3% | +1.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 16 | 8 | 1 | 22 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $2.89 | $5.90 | $0.16 | $5.48 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.2% | +0.0% | +3.3% | +0.6% |
TXN leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Analyst Outlook). MPWR leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). 1 tied.
ZJYL vs LFUS vs MPWR vs CTS vs TXN: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ZJYL or LFUS or MPWR or CTS or TXN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Monolithic Power Systems, Inc.
(MPWR) is the stronger pick with 26. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 2% for CTS Corporation (CTS). CTS Corporation (CTS) offers the better valuation at 27. 3x trailing P/E (25. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Littelfuse, Inc. (LFUS) a "Buy" — based on 12 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 — ZJYL or LFUS or MPWR or CTS or TXN?
On trailing P/E, CTS Corporation (CTS) is the cheapest at 27.
3x versus Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. at 123. 6x. On forward P/E, CTS Corporation is actually cheaper at 25. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: CTS Corporation wins at 1. 63x versus Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. 's 2. 28x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ZJYL or LFUS or MPWR or CTS or TXN?
Over the past 5 years, Monolithic Power Systems, Inc.
(MPWR) delivered a total return of +366. 2%, compared to -72. 3% for Jin Medical International Ltd. (ZJYL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MPWR returned +25. 3% versus ZJYL's -73. 3%. 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 — ZJYL or LFUS or MPWR or CTS or TXN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Texas Instruments Incorporated (TXN) is the lower-risk stock at 1.
09β versus Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. 's 2. 27β — meaning MPWR is approximately 108% more volatile than TXN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. (MPWR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 95% for Texas Instruments Incorporated — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ZJYL or LFUS or MPWR or CTS or TXN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Monolithic Power Systems, Inc.
(MPWR) is pulling ahead at 26. 4% versus 5. 2% for CTS Corporation (CTS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Jin Medical International Ltd. grew EPS 18. 7% year-over-year, compared to -172. 5% for Littelfuse, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, MPWR leads at 15. 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 — ZJYL or LFUS or MPWR or CTS or TXN?
Texas Instruments Incorporated (TXN) is the more profitable company, earning 28.
3% net margin versus -3. 0% for Littelfuse, Inc. — meaning it keeps 28. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TXN leads at 34. 1% versus 1. 6% for LFUS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — TXN leads at 57. 0%, 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 ZJYL or LFUS or MPWR or CTS or TXN 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, CTS Corporation (CTS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 63x versus Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. 's 2. 28x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, CTS Corporation (CTS) trades at 25. 4x forward P/E versus 67. 2x for Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. — 41. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MPWR: 2. 5% to $1615. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — ZJYL or LFUS or MPWR or CTS or TXN?
In this comparison, TXN (1.
9% yield), LFUS (0. 7% yield), MPWR (0. 4% yield), CTS (0. 3% yield) pay a dividend. ZJYL does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is ZJYL or LFUS or MPWR or CTS or TXN better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Texas Instruments Incorporated (TXN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1.
09), 1. 9% yield, +476. 4% 10Y return). Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. (MPWR) 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 (TXN: +476. 4%, MPWR: +25. 3%), 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 ZJYL and LFUS and MPWR and CTS and TXN?
These companies operate in different sectors (ZJYL (Healthcare) and LFUS (Technology) and MPWR (Technology) and CTS (Technology) and TXN (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: ZJYL is a small-cap high-growth stock; LFUS is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; MPWR is a mid-cap high-growth stock; CTS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; TXN is a large-cap quality compounder stock. LFUS, TXN pay a dividend while ZJYL, MPWR, CTS 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.