COMPARE · Data as of August 24, 2026
GRFS vs NVS
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. GRFS scored 70.9, NVS scored 53.4 — GRFS leads.
Compare another set
GRFS
Grifols, S.A.
70.9
$7.99 · $5.4B
Score gap
17.5
GRFS leads
NVS
Novartis AG
53.4
$158.02 · $300.4B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestGRFS10.4x
- Fastest growthGRFS+9.4%
- Strongest balance sheetNVS1.17
- Highest qualityNVS87 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueGRFS-49%
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)
GRFS
stronger →← stronger
NVS
56
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
87
77
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
68
96
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
26
GRFS is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
GRFS
NVS
$569mC+
FCF
$17.6bA-
+9.4%B
Rev
+8.4%B
1.17C
D/E
1.17C
10.4xA
P/E
24.0xB+
0.19A
PEG
3.63D
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
GRFS
NVS
49% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
4% below
~-4%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~7%/yr
+57%
1-yr DCF upside
-7%
+97%
5-yr DCF upside
+4%
+171%
10-yr DCF upside
+21%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
GRFS
Why this score
- Raising its dividend
- Foreign reporter (EUR)
NVS
Why this score
- Buying back stock
- Raising its dividend
The companies
GRFSGrifols, S.A.
Why now
Drug Manufacturers - General · market cap $5.4b. Down 22% from 52-week high of $10.23 — deep drawdown territory. PEG 0.19 — paying under fair value for the growth rate.
Moat
FCF converts 108% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined. Pharma moat is patent runway + pipeline depth — a single approved molecule funds the next generation of bets. Late-stage trials carry binary readouts that swing valuation 30%+.
Risk
Net margin 3.0% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first. ROE 2% 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. 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.
NVSNovartis AG
Why now
Drug Manufacturers - General · market cap $300.4b. 7% off the 52-week high of $170.46. 11 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $157.15 (implying -1% upside).
Moat
Net margin 26% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 30% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 126% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
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 GRFS and NVS diverge
On the headline score the gap is 17.5 points in favor of GRFS. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- ValueGRFS 96.3 · NVS 25.8GRFS +70.5
- QualityGRFS 56.1 · NVS 86.5NVS +30.4
- GrowthGRFS 77.0 · NVS 68.3GRFS +8.7
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.