COMPARE · Data as of August 24, 2026
BMY vs LLY
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. BMY scored 61.5, LLY scored 69.8 — LLY leads.
Compare another set
BMY
Bristol-Myers Squibb Company
61.5
$67.28 · $137.4B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
8.3
LLY leads
LLY
Eli Lilly and Company
69.8
$1,246.93 · $1.1T
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestBMY14.8x
- Fastest growthLLY+49.6%
- Strongest balance sheetLLY1.62
- Highest qualityBMY79 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueBMY-2%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
BMY
stronger →← stronger
LLY
79
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
73
57
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
97
52
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
48
BMY is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
BMY
LLY
$11.4bA-
FCF
$13.6bA-
+3.1%C+
Rev
+49.6%A
2.02D
D/E
1.62C
14.8xA-
P/E
42.2xC
2.37C
PEG
1.58C+
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
BMY
LLY
2% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
111% above
~-2%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~33%/yr
+13%
1-yr DCF upside
-64%
+2%
5-yr DCF upside
-53%
-12%
10-yr DCF upside
-27%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
BMY
LLY
Why this score
- Raising its dividend
The companies
BMYBristol-Myers Squibb Company
Why now
Drug Manufacturers - General · market cap $137.4b. Trading near 52-week high of $68.64 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. 24 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $66.21 (implying -2% upside).
Moat
Net margin 19% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 42% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 123% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
D/E 2.02 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Trading within 2% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. Trial-readout binary — late-stage clinical trials carry approve/reject outcomes that swing valuation 30%+; the equity is effectively a portfolio of these binary events, not a steady cash-flow business.
LLYEli Lilly and Company
Why now
Drug Manufacturers - General · market cap $1.1T. 4% off the 52-week high of $1292.65. Revenue growing +50% — in hypergrowth territory. 29 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $1,315 (implying +5% upside).
Moat
Net margin 34% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 79% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. $1.1T market cap places it among the largest companies in the sector — distribution, R&D, and customer-acquisition costs amortize across a base peers can't replicate.
Risk
Trailing P/E 42x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. P/S 14.0x embeds aggressive forward growth — disappointing top-line guidance would compress the multiple hard. Trial-readout binary — late-stage clinical trials carry approve/reject outcomes that swing valuation 30%+; the equity is effectively a portfolio of these binary events, not a steady cash-flow business.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where BMY and LLY diverge
On the headline score the gap is 8.3 points in favor of LLY. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- GrowthBMY 57.2 · LLY 97.0LLY +39.8
- QualityBMY 78.9 · LLY 73.0BMY +5.9
- ValueBMY 51.5 · LLY 48.0BMY +3.5
Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.