COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
ALC vs GMED
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ALC scored 73.3, GMED scored 79.2 — GMED leads.
Compare another set
ALC
Alcon Inc.
73.3
$73.63 · $35.6B
Score gap
5.9
GMED leads
GMED
Globus Medical, Inc.
79.2
$86.91 · $11.7B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestGMED22.2x
- Fastest growthGMED+19.7%
- Strongest balance sheetGMED0.02
- Highest qualityALC87 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueALC-30%
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)
ALC
stronger →← stronger
GMED
87
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
73
71
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
93
63
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
73
GMED is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
ALC
GMED
$2.1bB
FCF
$756mC+
+10.5%B
Rev
+19.7%B+
0.25B
D/E
0.02A-
56.2xC
P/E
22.2xB+
1.53C+
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
ALC
GMED
30% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
9% below
~0%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~3%/yr
+24%
1-yr DCF upside
+3%
+43%
5-yr DCF upside
+10%
+76%
10-yr DCF upside
+20%
These two disagree on this pair: the Value pillar ranks cheapness against sector peers, while price-vs-fair-value is an absolute read. A name can be the better value in its sector and still the dearer one on cash flows.
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
ALC
Why this score
- Durable high returns
GMED
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
ALCAlcon Inc.
Why now
Medical Instruments & Supplies · market cap $35.6b. 16% off the 52-week high of $87.64. Revenue growing +10%, comfortably above the S&P median. 15 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $85.24 (implying +16% upside).
Moat
Net margin 31% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 30% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which.
Risk
Trailing P/E 56.2x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating.
GMEDGlobus Medical, Inc.
Why now
Medical Devices · market cap $11.7b. 14% 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 +19% 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 ALC and GMED diverge
On the headline score the gap is 5.9 points in favor of GMED. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- GrowthALC 71.4 · GMED 93.4GMED +22.0
- QualityALC 87.5 · GMED 72.6ALC +14.9
- ValueALC 63.2 · GMED 73.3GMED +10.1
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.