COMPARE · Data as of August 27, 2026
DHR vs GMED
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. DHR scored 53.8, GMED scored 79.6 — GMED leads.
Compare another set
DHR
Danaher Corporation
53.8
$215.68 · $151.6B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
25.8
GMED leads
GMED
Globus Medical, Inc.
79.6
$82.54 · $11.1B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestGMED21.1x
- Fastest growthGMED+19.7%
- Strongest balance sheetGMED0.02
- Highest qualityGMED73 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueGMED-14%
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)
DHR
stronger →← stronger
GMED
62
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
73
60
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
93
42
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
74
GMED is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
DHR
GMED
$5.5bB+
FCF
$756mC+
+4.6%C+
Rev
+19.7%B+
0.53B
D/E
0.02A-
38.5xC+
P/E
21.1xB+
1.41B
PEG
1.49B
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
DHR
GMED
37% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
14% below
~14%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~2%/yr
-33%
1-yr DCF upside
+9%
-27%
5-yr DCF upside
+16%
-18%
10-yr DCF upside
+26%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
DHR
Why this score
- Raising its dividend
GMED
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
DHRDanaher Corporation
Why now
Diagnostics & Research · market cap $151.6b. 11% off the 52-week high of $242.80. 23 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $227.96 (implying +6% upside).
Moat
Net margin 16% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. FCF converts 137% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined. $151.6b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
Risk
Trailing P/E 39x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. ROE 8% is below the long-run sustainable threshold of ~10% — capital efficiency would need to improve for the equity base to compound at the market rate.
GMEDGlobus Medical, Inc.
Why now
Medical Devices · market cap $11.1b. 19% off the 52-week high of $101.40. Revenue growing +20%, comfortably above the S&P median. 13 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $103.23 (implying +25% upside).
Moat
Net margin 17% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 11% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 141% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Mature compounder — the risk is paying up for quality at a moment when growth is decelerating. Watch for sequential revenue + margin trends; the inflection from "compounder" to "ex-compounder" is hard to spot until the multiple already started compressing.
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 DHR and GMED diverge
On the headline score the gap is 25.8 points in favor of GMED. The widest single difference is Growth, where GMED leads by 33.0 points.
- GrowthDHR 60.4 · GMED 93.4GMED +33.0
- ValueDHR 41.7 · GMED 74.3GMED +32.6
- QualityDHR 62.0 · GMED 72.6GMED +10.6
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.