Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. PODD scored 81.3, GMED scored 80.5 — PODD leads.
Compare another set
PODD
Insulet Corporation
Medical Devices · Quality-Growth
81.3
$135.28 · $9.4B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
0.8
PODD leads
GMED
Globus Medical, Inc.
Medical Devices · Quality-Growth
80.5
$74.65 · $10.0B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestGMED19.1x
Fastest growthPODD+29.4%
Strongest balance sheetGMED0.02
Highest qualityPODD73 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueGMED-34%
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)
PODD
stronger →← stronger
GMED
73
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
72
95
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
88
77
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
82
PODD is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
PODD
GMED
$294mC
FCF
$746mC+
+29.4%A-
Rev
+16.7%B+
0.67C+
D/E
0.02A-
25.3xB
P/E
19.1xB+
1.06B+
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
PODD
GMED
50% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
34% below
~25%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~1%/yr
-48%
1-yr DCF upside
+28%
-33%
5-yr DCF upside
+51%
-3%
10-yr DCF upside
+91%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
The companies
PODDInsulet Corporation
Medical Devices · $135.28 · beta 1.10
Why now
Medical Devices · market cap $9.4b. Down 62% from 52-week high of $354.88 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +29% — in hypergrowth territory. 23 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $170.96 (implying +26% upside).
Moat
Net margin 12% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 26% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which.
Risk
Down 62% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
GMEDGlobus Medical, Inc.
Medical Devices · $74.65 · beta 0.96
Why now
Medical Devices · market cap $10.0b. Down 26% from 52-week high of $101.40 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +17%, comfortably above the S&P median. 13 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $100.92 (implying +35% 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 12% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 139% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
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
GMED leads PODD by 1 point (78.7 to 77.7), its sharpest advantage coming in D/E (grade A-). A contrarian could still prefer PODD for its stronger Rev (grade A-).
Our AI analyst is busy right now, so this verdict is drawn directly from the pillars, grades and DCF above.
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 PODD and GMED diverge
On the headline score the gap is 0.8 points in favor of PODD. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
GrowthPODD 95.2 · GMED 87.8PODD +7.4
ValuePODD 77.2 · GMED 82.4GMED +5.2
QualityPODD 73.0 · GMED 72.0level
Pillars run 0–100. Value is judged against each company's own sector, so a Value 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.
Common questions
Is PODD or GMED the better stock?
PODD scores higher: PODD 81.3, GMED 80.5 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
Where do PODD and GMED differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where PODD leads by 7 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. Neither name sweeps: they trade the lead across the three pillars, so the comparison is a trade-off rather than one being better on every measure.
How are PODD and GMED scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.