COMPARE · Data as of August 27, 2026
MDLN vs RMD
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. MDLN scored 43.4, RMD scored 81.0 — RMD leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. RMD's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but MDLN's are as of December 2025 — a 6-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
MDLN
Medline Inc.
43.4
$34.65 · $46.6B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
37.6
RMD leads
RMD
ResMed Inc.
81
$236.49 · $34.1B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestRMD22.7x
- Fastest growthMDLN+11.5%
- Strongest balance sheetRMD0.13
- Highest qualityRMD90 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueRMD-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)
MDLN
stronger →← stronger
RMD
47
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
90
85
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
82
20
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
72
RMD is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
MDLN
RMD
$1.3bC+
FCF
$1.6bC+
+11.5%B
Rev
+9.9%B
0.66C+
D/E
0.13B+
43.3xC
P/E
22.7xB+
12.37D
PEG
1.34B
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
MDLN
RMD
142% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
2% below
~26%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~6%/yr
-59%
1-yr DCF upside
-6%
-59%
5-yr DCF upside
+2%
-58%
10-yr DCF upside
+16%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
MDLN
Why this score
- Short track record
RMD
Why this score
- Raising its dividend
- Durable high returns
The companies
MDLNMedline Inc.
Why now
Medical Instruments & Supplies · market cap $46.6b. Down 32% from 52-week high of $50.88 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +11%, comfortably above the S&P median. 26 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $44.62 (implying +29% upside).
Moat
ROE 10% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 112% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Down 32% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Trailing P/E 43x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. Net margin 4.1% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
RMDResMed Inc.
Why now
Medical Instruments & Supplies · market cap $34.1b. 17% off the 52-week high of $284.87. 16 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $245.50 (implying +4% upside).
Moat
Net margin 27% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 23% sits above Buffett's preferred 15% threshold — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 108% 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 MDLN and RMD diverge
On the headline score the gap is 37.6 points in favor of RMD. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- ValueMDLN 20.3 · RMD 72.1RMD +51.8
- QualityMDLN 47.4 · RMD 90.3RMD +42.9
- GrowthMDLN 85.1 · RMD 81.6MDLN +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.