Medical Devices: Abbott Laboratories owns the largest revenue base; Glaukos Corporation has the fastest current growth.
The industry itself · before any single company
How has Medical Devices moved against S&P 500?
The line below covers 5.2 years. Over the most recent two of them this industry is 0% behind S&P 500. Earnings across its companies grew 20% on average over the last four reported quarters. It has been ahead of S&P 500 on a rolling three-month view for 6 weeks running.
BREAKING OUT · ahead 6w~Moving with the index31 of 70 companies ahead of S&P 500 by 5% or more over three months7 are 20% or more behind over a year while earnings grew 20% or more
Medical Devices, equal-weighted, based at 200S&P 500, same base, same starttrailing 12-month earnings per share risingfalling
Strength anatomyMixedHow much of the industry is participating, how recently, and whether the movers score well.
Together31 of 70 stocks moving
Fresh11 crossed in the last 4 weeks
Backed by scoresmovers score +3 vs the industry average
Down the cap ladder — bar is now, tick is four weeks ago
Large4/14+4
Mid14/25+3
Small13/31−1
Participation is not spreading downward this month; the larger companies are still carrying most of it.
Both lines start at 200 in the same week, so the distance between them is the whole story: the industry line is an equal-weighted index of its 70 companies. The bars underneath are trailing 12-month earnings per share, one bar per reported quarter, each member rebased to 100 at the start and the industry taking the median — so a price line pulling away from flat bars is a re-rating, not earnings. A bar turns red when that figure is lower than the quarter before. Rules are fixed and applied identically everywhere on this site: ahead by 5% or more over three months, or behind by 20% or more over a year while earnings grew 20% or more. Hover any point to read both values and the gap. This is a description of what the numbers did, not advice.
Sector relative strength · before individual stocks
Is Medical Devices outperforming S&P 500?
Medical Devices has outperformed S&P 500 by 10.3% over the last 52 weeks. Over 13 weeks the gap is a lead of 12.1%. 15 of 30 covered companies currently beat the S&P 500 on Mansfield relative strength, so leadership inside the sector is selective. Butterfly Network, Inc. is the strongest against the sector itself at +66.3%.
+12.1%Sector vs S&P 500 · 13 weeks
+10.3%Sector vs S&P 500 · 52 weeks
15/30Stocks leading S&P 500
11/30Stocks leading sector
Sector metric: — as of latest available · unclassified · direction unavailable.
The central tension: the companies with the most scale are not necessarily the companies creating the most change.
Start with scale. Then earnings trajectory. Then business quality. Only after those three agree should price leadership carry much weight.
Bottom line
Medical Devices has outperformed S&P 500 by 10.3% over 52 weeks and 12.1% over 13 weeks. 15 of 30 covered companies beat the S&P 500 on Mansfield relative strength, while 11 of 30 beat the sector itself. Abbott Laboratories leads with revenue of $46,585 million, based on 25 of 30 comparable companies through Jun 2026.
Is the Medical Devices sector outperforming S&P 500?
Medical Devices has outperformed S&P 500 by 10.3% over 52 weeks and 12.1% over 13 weeks. 15 of 30 covered companies beat the S&P 500 on Mansfield relative strength, while 11 of 30 beat the sector itself.
Which Medical Devices company is largest by revenue?
Abbott Laboratories leads with revenue of $46,585 million, based on 25 of 30 comparable companies through Jun 2026.
Which Medical Devices company is growing fastest?
Glaukos Corporation has the fastest current revenue growth at 36.3%, across 25 of 30 comparable companies.
Which Medical Devices company has the strongest 4-Factor Sector Score?
DexCom, Inc. ranks first at 69.1/100 with 82% evidence confidence. The score prioritizes research; it is not a buy recommendation.
Which Medical Devices company reports the most CAPEX?
Medtronic plc reports the largest latest CAPEX at $488 million, with 30 of 30 companies comparable.
Which Medical Devices company has the least gross debt?
Butterfly Network, Inc. has the lowest comparable gross debt at $17 million. Abbott Laboratories has the highest at $34,047 million.
Which Medical Devices company has the lowest comparable PEG?
Haemonetics Corporation has the lowest comparable Guarded PEG at 0.52, among 11 of 30 companies that pass the metric’s comparability rules.
How much history does this Medical Devices comparison include?
The page compares up to 20 reported quarters per company for fundamentals, CAPEX, debt and valuation, ending Jun 2026. Missing observations remain blank rather than being estimated.
How is the 4-Factor Sector Score calculated?
The four visible contributions add directly: growth and earnings up to 35 points, capital efficiency up to 25, valuation up to 20, and relative strength up to 20. Missing or stale evidence moves only the affected contribution toward neutral.
Companies
30
complete canonical membership
Combined market value
$781.5B
Abbott Laboratories
Revenue growing
22/25
positive TTM year-on-year growth
Beating S&P 500
15/30
positive Mansfield relative strength
Global company selection
00 · research priority, made explicit
4-Factor Sector Score
An additive sector-relative research score. The four displayed point contributions always equal the total: Growth & earnings (35), Capital efficiency (25), Valuation (20), and Relative strength (20). Missing or stale evidence is absorbed inside the affected factor, never applied as a hidden adjustment.
DexCom, Inc. has the strongest current balance of earnings trajectory, business quality, valuation and price confirmation, with 82% evidence confidence.
Haemonetics Corporation looks inexpensive relative to peers or its own history, but its earnings trajectory has not yet earned the valuation signal.
UFP Technologies, Inc. has stronger price confirmation than earnings confirmation; that is a research prompt, not permission to chase.
Missing observations are not scored as bad. Their missing weight lowers confidence and pulls the final score toward neutral. PEG is guarded: positive earnings, positive 5–60% three-year EPS growth, and a positive P/E are required.
Decision use: Acceleration candidate, not a confirmed leader: earnings are strong but sector-relative strength is -10% and the one-year return is 53.1%. Do not upgrade until sector-relative strength is above zero and another reported period confirms growth.
Decision use: Acceleration candidate, not a confirmed leader: earnings are strong but sector-relative strength is -29.9% and the one-year return is -28.9%. Do not upgrade until sector-relative strength is above zero and another reported period confirms growth.
Decision use: Fill the missing evidence before acting; the ranking is deliberately pulled toward neutral.
17.6/35Growth & earnings
Revenue — · PAT — · OPM change —
9% evidence
12.6/25Capital efficiency
ROCE 2.1% · debt/equity —
34% evidence
10.7/20Valuation
P/E 22.9× · PEG —
15% evidence
4.4/20Relative strength
RS sector -14.5% · RS bench -9.8% · 1Y 5.6%
100% evidence
01 · compare level, then change
Revenue Scale & Growth Durability
Abbott Laboratories has the highest Revenue among the 30 Medical Devices companies compared here, at $46,585 million. Medtronic plc is next at $36,363 million. Glaukos Corporation has the highest Revenue growth at 36.3%, so level and change sit with different companies. 25 of 30 companies report a comparable reading, the latest through Jun 2026.
What the numbers say: Abbott Laboratories is the scale leader at $46,585 million, 28.1% ahead of Medtronic plc. Glaukos Corporation's growth is 36.3% from a $552 million base, with 19 reported observations in the 20-quarter window. Treat the growth leader as an acceleration candidate, not as equally proven scale.
LeaderAbbott Laboratories · $46,585 million
Gap28.1% versus #2 · Medtronic plc
Persistence8/8 recent comparable periods
Coverage25/30 companies · 559 observations
Investor read: Abbott Laboratories is the scale benchmark; Glaukos Corporation is the acceleration watch. Promote the challenger only if growth persists and converts into margin and returns.
This conclusion weakens if: Abbott Laboratories's growth falls below Glaukos Corporation's for two consecutive comparable reports while operating margin also compresses.
Revenue is compared on a common reported-currency basis. Growth is year-on-year, so seasonality does not masquerade as progress.
Revenuelargest
1Abbott Laboratories ABT$46.6B
2Medtronic plc MDT$36.4B
3Stryker Corporation SYK$25.3B
4GE HealthCare Technologies Inc. GEHC$21.0B
5Boston Scientific Corporation BSX$20.6B
Revenue growthfastest growers
1Glaukos Corporation GKOS36%
2Establishment Labs Holdings Inc. ESTA35%
3Insulet Corporation PODD32%
4TransMedics Group, Inc. TMDX30%
5iRhythm Holdings, Inc. IRTC27%
Revenue · company comparison
25/30 level · 25/30 change
Solid lines show level; dotted lines show change when “Both” is selected. Missing reports break the line rather than being invented.
All-company data · latest reported quarter
Each figure is the company’s latest single reported quarter. The rankings above use trailing-twelve-month or current-market values, so a company can legitimately show a different number in each.
Showing the 12 largest of 30 companies with a series here. The remaining 18 are complete in the plain-text rendition and the trace payload — nothing is dropped from the data, only from this grid.
Showing the 12 largest of 30 companies with a series here. The remaining 18 are complete in the plain-text rendition and the trace payload — nothing is dropped from the data, only from this grid.
Edwards Lifesciences Corporation has the highest OPM among the 30 Medical Devices companies compared here, at 29%. DexCom, Inc. is next at 21.4%. LivaNova PLC has the highest Margin change at +109.8 percentage points, so level and change sit with different companies. 29 of 30 companies report a comparable reading, the latest through Jun 2026.
What the numbers say: Edwards Lifesciences Corporation leads opm at 29%; LivaNova PLC leads margin change at +109.8 percentage points.
LeaderEdwards Lifesciences Corporation · 29%
Gap35.5% versus #2 · DexCom, Inc.
Persistence3/8 recent comparable periods
Coverage29/30 companies · 549 observations
Investor read: Edwards Lifesciences Corporation sets the level benchmark; use the change leader as an inflection watch only after another comparable report confirms it.
This conclusion weakens if: The next two comparable reports reverse the current margin change signal.
Operating margin compares operating profit with revenue. Improvement is measured in percentage points, not percentage growth.
OPMhighest
1Edwards Lifesciences Corporation EW29%
2DexCom, Inc. DXCM21%
3Boston Scientific Corporation BSX21%
4STERIS plc STE20%
5Globus Medical, Inc. GMED20%
Margin changefastest expanders
1LivaNova PLC LIVN+109.8 pp
2Butterfly Network, Inc. BFLY+34.7 pp
3Establishment Labs Holdings Inc. ESTA+30.1 pp
4iRhythm Holdings, Inc. IRTC+12.4 pp
5Enovis Corporation ENOV+9.5 pp
Operating margin · company comparison
29/30 level · 29/30 change
Solid lines show level; dotted lines show change when “Both” is selected. Missing reports break the line rather than being invented.
All-company data · latest reported quarter
Each figure is the company’s latest single reported quarter. The rankings above use trailing-twelve-month or current-market values, so a company can legitimately show a different number in each.
Showing the 12 largest of 29 companies with a series here. The remaining 17 are complete in the plain-text rendition and the trace payload — nothing is dropped from the data, only from this grid.
Showing the 12 largest of 29 companies with a series here. The remaining 17 are complete in the plain-text rendition and the trace payload — nothing is dropped from the data, only from this grid.
Abbott Laboratories has the highest Net profit among the 30 Medical Devices companies compared here, at $5,425 million. Medtronic plc is next at $4,837 million. Globus Medical, Inc. has the highest Profit growth at the 100% top of the scoring scale, so level and change sit with different companies.
What the numbers say: Abbott Laboratories leads with $5,425 million of TTM profit, 12.2% above Medtronic plc. Globus Medical, Inc. shows ≥100% on the scoring scale (215.6% uncapped) growth from a $587 million profit base. Compare the size of the base and persistence before ranking acceleration above profit scale.
LeaderAbbott Laboratories · $5,425 million
Gap12.2% versus #2 · Medtronic plc
Persistence4/8 recent comparable periods
Coverage25/30 companies · 559 observations
Investor read: Abbott Laboratories sets the level benchmark; use the change leader as an inflection watch only after another comparable report confirms it.
This conclusion weakens if: The next two comparable reports reverse the current profit growth signal.
Net profit is the residual after operating costs, interest and tax. Growth off a loss or near-zero base is excluded from the fastest-grower rank.
Net profitlargest
1Abbott Laboratories ABT$5.4B
2Medtronic plc MDT$4.8B
3Boston Scientific Corporation BSX$3.6B
4Stryker Corporation SYK$3.3B
5GE HealthCare Technologies Inc. GEHC$2.0B
Profit growthfastest growers
1Globus Medical, Inc. GMED100%
2Penumbra, Inc. PEN100%
3Koninklijke Philips N.V. PHG100%
4TransMedics Group, Inc. TMDX100%
5Boston Scientific Corporation BSX76%
Net profit · company comparison
25/30 level · 16/30 change
Solid lines show level; dotted lines show change when “Both” is selected. Missing reports break the line rather than being invented.
All-company data · latest reported quarter
Each figure is the company’s latest single reported quarter. The rankings above use trailing-twelve-month or current-market values, so a company can legitimately show a different number in each.
Showing the 12 largest of 30 companies with a series here. The remaining 18 are complete in the plain-text rendition and the trace payload — nothing is dropped from the data, only from this grid.
Showing the 12 largest of 26 companies with a series here. The remaining 14 are complete in the plain-text rendition and the trace payload — nothing is dropped from the data, only from this grid.
Medtronic plc has the highest CAPEX among the 30 Medical Devices companies compared here, at $488 million. Abbott Laboratories is next at $399 million. TransMedics Group, Inc. has the highest CAPEX intensity at 21.3%, so level and change sit with different companies. 30 of 30 companies report a comparable reading, the latest through Jun 2026.
What the numbers say: Medtronic plc reports $488 million of CAPEX; TransMedics Group, Inc. has the highest covered intensity at 21.3%. Coverage is only 30 of 30 companies and 551 reported observations, so this is partial evidence—not a complete sector rank.
LeaderMedtronic plc · $488 million
Gap22.3% versus #2 · Abbott Laboratories
Persistence8/8 recent comparable periods
Coverage30/30 companies · 551 observations
Investor read: Use the CAPEX rank as a diligence queue. Verify commissioning, utilization, cash conversion and post-investment ROCE before treating spend as value creation.
This conclusion weakens if: CAPEX rises without higher utilization, operating cash flow or incremental returns.
CAPEX is cash spent on property, plant, equipment and other reported capital assets. CAPEX intensity divides that spend by revenue; high intensity is a reinvestment signal, not proof that the reinvestment will earn attractive returns.
CAPEXlargest spenders
1Medtronic plc MDT$488M
2Abbott Laboratories ABT$399M
3Smith & Nephew plc SNN · older report$294M
4GE HealthCare Technologies Inc. GEHC$178M
5Boston Scientific Corporation BSX$177M
CAPEX intensityhighest reinvestment intensity
1TransMedics Group, Inc. TMDX21%
2Smith & Nephew plc SNN · older report9.2%
3Enovis Corporation ENOV9.0%
4DexCom, Inc. DXCM6.5%
5Neogen Corporation NEOG5.7%
Capital expenditure · company comparison
30/30 level · 30/30 change
Solid lines show level; dotted lines show change when “Both” is selected. Missing reports break the line rather than being invented.
All-company data · latest reported quarter
Each figure is the company’s latest single reported quarter. The rankings above use trailing-twelve-month or current-market values, so a company can legitimately show a different number in each.
Showing the 12 largest of 30 companies with a series here. The remaining 18 are complete in the plain-text rendition and the trace payload — nothing is dropped from the data, only from this grid.
Showing the 12 largest of 30 companies with a series here. The remaining 18 are complete in the plain-text rendition and the trace payload — nothing is dropped from the data, only from this grid.
Capacity base is net fixed assets plus capital work in progress, straight off the reported balance sheet. It is not cash spent, so it answers a narrower question than CAPEX — but it is reported for companies whose cash-flow CAPEX is not published, which is why it leads here. Missing years remain blank; annual values are never relabelled as quarters.
Full annual capacity base, operating cash flow, CAPEX and free cash flow history
Capacity base · net fixed assets + CWIP · fiscal-year history
Showing the 12 largest of 30 companies with a series here. The remaining 18 are complete in the plain-text rendition and the trace payload — nothing is dropped from the data, only from this grid.
Showing the 12 largest of 30 companies with a series here. The remaining 18 are complete in the plain-text rendition and the trace payload — nothing is dropped from the data, only from this grid.
Showing the 12 largest of 30 companies with a series here. The remaining 18 are complete in the plain-text rendition and the trace payload — nothing is dropped from the data, only from this grid.
Showing the 12 largest of 30 companies with a series here. The remaining 18 are complete in the plain-text rendition and the trace payload — nothing is dropped from the data, only from this grid.
Butterfly Network, Inc. has the lowest Gross debt among the 30 Medical Devices companies compared here, at $17 million. Axogen, Inc. is next at $21 million. Edwards Lifesciences Corporation has the lowest Net debt at $2,969 million net cash, so level and change sit with different companies. 29 of 30 companies report a comparable reading, the latest through Mar 2026.
What the numbers say: Edwards Lifesciences Corporation has the clearest covered balance-sheet capacity with $2,969 million net cash and gross debt of $703 million. Absolute debt alone does not identify the strongest balance sheet because company scale differs; net debt and debt-to-equity carry more information.
LeaderButterfly Network, Inc. · $17 million
Gap19% versus #2 · Axogen, Inc.
Persistence8/8 recent comparable periods
Coverage29/30 companies · 547 observations
Investor read: Prioritize net-cash capacity and leverage relative to operating scale, not the smallest absolute rupee debt.
This conclusion weakens if: Net debt rises faster than revenue and profit for two consecutive reported periods.
Gross debt shows contractual borrowings. Net debt subtracts reported cash; a negative value means net cash. Lower debt can create capacity, but should be read against the scale and capital intensity of the business.
Gross debtlowest gross debt
1Butterfly Network, Inc. BFLY$17M
2Axogen, Inc. AXGN$21M
3Glaukos Corporation GKOS$103M
4Globus Medical, Inc. GMED$115M
5UFP Technologies, Inc. UFPT$156M
Net debtlowest net debt
1Edwards Lifesciences Corporation EW$-3.0B
2DexCom, Inc. DXCM$-1.1B
3Globus Medical, Inc. GMED$-515M
4Penumbra, Inc. PEN$-400M
5NovoCure Limited NVCR$-208M
Debt and balance-sheet capacity · company comparison
29/30 level · 29/30 change
Solid lines show level; dotted lines show change when “Both” is selected. Missing reports break the line rather than being invented.
All-company data · latest reported quarter
Each figure is the company’s latest single reported quarter. The rankings above use trailing-twelve-month or current-market values, so a company can legitimately show a different number in each.
Showing the 12 largest of 29 companies with a series here. The remaining 17 are complete in the plain-text rendition and the trace payload — nothing is dropped from the data, only from this grid.
Showing the 12 largest of 29 companies with a series here. The remaining 17 are complete in the plain-text rendition and the trace payload — nothing is dropped from the data, only from this grid.
Edwards Lifesciences Corporation has the highest ROCE among the 30 Medical Devices companies compared here, at 8.5%. DexCom, Inc. is next at 6.3%. LivaNova PLC has the highest ROCE change at +18.1 percentage points, so level and change sit with different companies. 30 of 30 companies report a comparable reading, the latest through Jun 2026.
What the numbers say: Edwards Lifesciences Corporation leads ROCE at 8.5%, 2.2 percentage points above DexCom, Inc.. LivaNova PLC has the strongest latest improvement at +18.1 percentage points. Read the leader beside the density of its reported history: a sparse high return is a candidate; a repeated high return is evidence of durability.
LeaderEdwards Lifesciences Corporation · 8.5%
Gap34.9% versus #2 · DexCom, Inc.
Persistence2/8 recent comparable periods
Coverage30/30 companies · 561 observations
Investor read: Edwards Lifesciences Corporation sets the level benchmark; use the change leader as an inflection watch only after another comparable report confirms it.
This conclusion weakens if: The next two comparable reports reverse the current roce change signal.
ROCE asks how much operating return the business earns on the capital employed. Direction matters, but a single exceptional year should not be mistaken for durability.
ROCEhighest
1Edwards Lifesciences Corporation EW8.5%
2DexCom, Inc. DXCM6.3%
3Abbott Laboratories ABT4.8%
4Insulet Corporation PODD4.6%
5UFP Technologies, Inc. UFPT4.0%
ROCE changefastest improvers
1LivaNova PLC LIVN+18.1 pp
2Edwards Lifesciences Corporation EW+4.6 pp
3Establishment Labs Holdings Inc. ESTA+4.1 pp
4DexCom, Inc. DXCM+3.2 pp
5NovoCure Limited NVCR+3.1 pp
Return on capital · company comparison
30/30 level · 30/30 change
Solid lines show level; dotted lines show change when “Both” is selected. Missing reports break the line rather than being invented.
All-company data · latest reported quarter
Each figure is the company’s latest single reported quarter. The rankings above use trailing-twelve-month or current-market values, so a company can legitimately show a different number in each.
Showing the 12 largest of 30 companies with a series here. The remaining 18 are complete in the plain-text rendition and the trace payload — nothing is dropped from the data, only from this grid.
Showing the 12 largest of 30 companies with a series here. The remaining 18 are complete in the plain-text rendition and the trace payload — nothing is dropped from the data, only from this grid.
Haemonetics Corporation has the lowest Guarded PEG among the 30 Medical Devices companies compared here, at 0.52×. DexCom, Inc. is next at 0.68×. GE HealthCare Technologies Inc. has the lowest P/E at 17×, so level and change sit with different companies. 11 of 30 companies report a comparable reading, the latest through Mar 2026.
What the numbers say: Haemonetics Corporation has the lowest comparable Guarded PEG at 0.52×, 23.5% below DexCom, Inc.. Only 11 of 30 companies pass the guard, so no broad “cheapest stock” conclusion is defensible unless the current multiple, own-history position and growth durability agree.
LeaderHaemonetics Corporation · 0.52×
Gap23.5% versus #2 · DexCom, Inc.
Persistence0/8 recent comparable periods
Coverage11/30 companies · 69 observations
Investor read: Treat valuation as permission to investigate, never as a standalone reason to buy.
This conclusion weakens if: The next two comparable reports reverse the current p/e signal.
PEG is shown only when earnings are positive and three-year EPS growth is between 5% and 60%. It is recomputed consistently as the trailing P/E divided by that growth rate — reported earnings, never an expected-earnings multiple. On Indian companies it is shown only where the two data sources reconciled. A missing PEG is more honest than a low-base fiction.
Guarded PEGlowest PEG
1Haemonetics Corporation HAE0.5
2DexCom, Inc. DXCM0.7
3Globus Medical, Inc. GMED0.9
4Boston Scientific Corporation BSX0.9
5STERIS plc STE1.0
P/Elowest P/E
1GE HealthCare Technologies Inc. GEHC17.0
2Globus Medical, Inc. GMED20.0
3Integer Holdings Corporation ITGR21.6
4UFP Technologies, Inc. UFPT22.0
5Medtronic plc MDT22.3
Valuation · company comparison
11/30 level · 24/30 change
Solid lines show level; dotted lines show change when “Both” is selected. Missing reports break the line rather than being invented.
All-company data · latest reported quarter
Each figure is the company’s latest single reported quarter. The rankings above use trailing-twelve-month or current-market values, so a company can legitimately show a different number in each.
Showing the 12 largest of 14 companies with a series here. The remaining 2 are complete in the plain-text rendition and the trace payload — nothing is dropped from the data, only from this grid.
Showing the 12 largest of 24 companies with a series here. The remaining 12 are complete in the plain-text rendition and the trace payload — nothing is dropped from the data, only from this grid.
LivaNova PLC has the lowest EV/EBITDA among the 30 Medical Devices companies compared here, at 2.23×. Enovis Corporation is next at 9.66×. Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation has the lowest P/BV at 0.7×, so level and change sit with different companies. 27 of 30 companies report a comparable reading, the latest through Mar 2026.
What the numbers say: LivaNova PLC leads ev/ebitda at 2.23×; Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation leads p/bv at 0.7×.
LeaderLivaNova PLC · 2.23×
Gap76.9% versus #2 · Enovis Corporation
Persistence0/8 recent comparable periods
Coverage27/30 companies · 426 observations
Investor read: Treat valuation as permission to investigate, never as a standalone reason to buy.
This conclusion weakens if: The next two comparable reports reverse the current p/bv signal.
EV/EBITDA includes debt in enterprise value and is useful across different capital structures. P/BV prices the company against its own book. Both are market multiples on reported figures, not intrinsic-value estimates and not forecasts.
Enterprise and book valuation · company comparison
27/30 level · 30/30 change
Solid lines show level; dotted lines show change when “Both” is selected. Missing reports break the line rather than being invented.
All-company data · latest reported quarter
Each figure is the company’s latest single reported quarter. The rankings above use trailing-twelve-month or current-market values, so a company can legitimately show a different number in each.
Showing the 12 largest of 27 companies with a series here. The remaining 15 are complete in the plain-text rendition and the trace payload — nothing is dropped from the data, only from this grid.
Showing the 12 largest of 30 companies with a series here. The remaining 18 are complete in the plain-text rendition and the trace payload — nothing is dropped from the data, only from this grid.
Butterfly Network, Inc. has the strongest one-year price move in Medical Devices at +412.1%. It also leads on Mansfield relative strength against the S&P 500 at +74.7%. 15 of 30 covered companies are above zero on that measure. Every line covers 314 weekly closes through 2026-07-28.
Every price line is indexed to 100 over the chosen window. Mansfield relative strength compares a price ratio with its own 52-week average; zero separates leadership from lagging.
Price and relative strength
Price is rebased to 100 inside the selected window. Pair ratio rebases each selected company against one chosen denominator.
Before the conclusion · check the blind spots
What can make this comparison misleading?
This Medical Devices comparison names 5 specific ways its own evidence can mislead, all listed below. 1 of the 30 companies reports on an older date than the sector's freshest reporters, so its rank is marked stale. A high growth rate can still be a low-base artefact.
Keep these limits visible
A high growth rate can be a low-base artefact. The page keeps level and change separate for that reason.
A high ROCE can be temporary or flattered by a small capital base. Read it beside margin, cash conversion and reinvestment.
The 4-Factor Sector Score ranks research priority, not portfolio action. Management quality, catalysts and risks need equally fresh evidence before capital is deployed.
An “all companies” line chart preserves completeness, but rank changes should be checked against reporting dates before drawing a conclusion.
1 company has an older fundamental reporting date than the sector’s freshest reporters; its rank carries a stale marker.
10 · the complete set
Which companies are included?
All 30 companies in the canonical Medical Devices membership are listed below, largest market value first — nothing is silently dropped, even where a company reports too little to rank. The charts above default to a selective view; this register is the complete set, with each company's own latest reporting date beside it.
AHEAD means the company is beating the index by 5% or more over three months. LAGGING, FUNDAMENTALS UP means it is 20% or more behind over a year while its trailing twelve-month earnings grew 20% or more. Both rules are fixed and applied the same way in every sector.
This comparison is built from the reported filings of 30 Medical Devices companies, normalized to a common $ scale and a shared quarter axis of up to 20 quarters each. Fundamentals run through Jun 2026 and market data through 2026-07-28. A second data feed fills gaps only after identity and scale reconciliation, and missing observations are never interpolated.
FundamentalsThrough Jun 2026 · up to 20 quarters per company
Market dataThrough 2026-07-28 · weekly price and relative-strength history
Derived metricsGrowth, changes, CAPEX intensity, net debt, guarded PEG and P/BV÷ROE are calculated only when their inputs are comparable.
Score confidenceMissing and stale evidence reduces confidence and pulls the 0–100 research-priority score toward neutral.
These 18 answers restate the Medical Devices comparison above in question form. Every one is computed from the same 30 companies and the same reported filings as the rankings and charts, current through Jun 2026. Price and relative-strength answers run through 2026-07-28. Nothing here is estimated, and none of it is a recommendation.
Which Medical Devices company is the biggest?
Abbott Laboratories is the largest, with trailing-twelve-month revenue of $46,585 million, ahead of Medtronic plc at $36,363 million. That covers 25 of 30 companies with comparable reporting through Jun 2026.
Which Medical Devices company is growing fastest?
Glaukos Corporation has the fastest revenue growth at 36.3% year on year, across 25 of 30 comparable companies. Fast growth off a small base is not the same as proven scale — check whether the rate holds across several quarters on the chart above before treating it as a trend.
Which Medical Devices company has the best profit margins?
Edwards Lifesciences Corporation has the highest operating margin at 29%, from 29 of 30 comparable companies. LivaNova PLC shows the biggest recent improvement, at +109.8 percentage points. A high margin matters most when it is holding or rising, not when it is peaking.
Which Medical Devices company makes the most profit?
Abbott Laboratories earns the most, at $5,425 million of trailing-twelve-month net profit, from 25 of 30 comparable companies. Globus Medical, Inc. has the fastest profit growth at 100%, though growth off a small or recovering profit base overstates how much has actually changed.
Which Medical Devices company earns the highest return on capital?
Edwards Lifesciences Corporation leads on return on capital employed at 8.5%, across 30 of 30 companies. Read it beside the length of its reported history: a high return that repeats for years is evidence of a durable business, while a single high reading can be a small capital base or one good year.
Which Medical Devices stock is the cheapest?
On guarded PEG — where a LOWER number is cheaper — Haemonetics Corporation screens cheapest at 0.52×. Only 11 of 30 companies pass the comparability guard, so this is not a sector-wide "cheapest stock" verdict. Cheap on a multiple is a reason to investigate, never a reason to buy on its own.
Which Medical Devices company has the strongest balance sheet?
Butterfly Network, Inc. carries the lowest comparable gross debt at $17 million, from 29 of 30 companies. Absolute rupee debt alone does not settle it, because company scale differs — net debt and debt-to-equity in the chart above carry more information, and a very low-debt balance sheet can also mean under-investment.
Which Medical Devices company is investing most in new capacity?
Medtronic plc reports the largest capital spending at $488 million, across 30 of 30 companies. Spending consumes cash before it earns anything, so treat the ranking as a diligence queue: check commissioning, utilisation and the return earned on the completed assets before reading spend as value creation.
Is the Medical Devices sector beating the market?
Medical Devices has outperformed S&P 500 by 10.3% over the last 52 weeks and 12.1% over 13 weeks, measured on an equal-weight index of its current members. Inside the sector, 15 of 30 covered companies are beating the market on their own. Sector strength does not transfer evenly to every stock in it.
Which Medical Devices stock has the strongest price momentum?
Butterfly Network, Inc. has the strongest relative strength against S&P 500. Relative strength answers last, after growth, quality and valuation: price can move well before the fundamentals confirm it, and sometimes without them confirming at all.
Which Medical Devices company scores highest for research priority?
DexCom, Inc. scores 69.1 out of 100 with 82% evidence confidence, from 26.4 points on growth and earnings, 16.5 on capital efficiency, 14.7 on valuation and 11.5 on relative strength. This ranks what deserves work next. It is not a buy recommendation, and management quality, catalysts and risk still need separate research.
How many Medical Devices companies does this comparison cover, and over what period?
It compares 30 listed companies over up to 20 reported quarters of fundamentals and 6 fiscal years of capital allocation, ending Jun 2026, plus weekly price and relative-strength history. Membership is the full sector list — nothing is dropped for having thin data.
What is the total market cap of the Medical Devices sector?
The 30 Medical Devices companies on this page carry $781,484 million of combined market value. Abbott Laboratories is the largest at $186,844 million, about 24% of the sector's total on its own. Market value moves with price, so this reading is dated 2026-07-28.
What is the Medical Devices sector's P/E ratio?
The median price-to-earnings ratio across the 30 Medical Devices companies on this page is 27.9×, measured on the 24 that report a comparable figure. A sector-level history for this multiple is not held here, so this is a cross-section of today, not a comparison with the sector’s own past. Figures are as of 2026-07-28.
How is the Medical Devices sector performing?
15 of the 30 covered Medical Devices companies are beating S&P 500 on Mansfield relative strength. The sector itself is 10.3% ahead of S&P 500 over 52 weeks on an equal-weight index of its current members. Readings are as of 2026-07-28.
How many Medical Devices stocks are listed in the US?
This comparison covers 30 listed Medical Devices companies in the US, each above the size floor the site applies. The full ranked list is on this page, with reported fundamentals through Jun 2026. Membership is the full industry list — nothing is dropped for having thin data.
Why are some values on this page blank?
A blank means that company did not report a comparable figure for that period, so nothing is shown. Missing observations are never interpolated, carried forward, or replaced with a similar-looking accounting line, and a company with missing evidence has its research score pulled toward neutral rather than being scored as bad.
Is this investment advice?
No. Every figure here is a deterministic calculation from reported company filings and market data, published for research. It contains no recommendation to buy or sell any security, does not account for your circumstances, and is not a substitute for advice from a licensed adviser.