Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. QGEN scored 55.9, MEDP scored 76.6 — MEDP leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. MEDP's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but QGEN'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.
QGEN
Qiagen N.V.
Diagnostics & Research · Quality-Growth
55.9
$45.38 · $9.4B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
20.7
MEDP leads
MEDP
Medpace Holdings, Inc.
Diagnostics & Research · Quality-Growth
76.6
$612.05 · $17.1B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestQGEN23.0x
Fastest growthMEDP+24.7%
Strongest balance sheetMEDP0.33
Highest qualityMEDP87 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueQGEN-8%
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)
QGEN
stronger →← stronger
MEDP
64
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
87
49
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
88
56
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
58
MEDP is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
QGEN
MEDP
$453mC
FCF
$707mC+
+5.7%C+
Rev
+24.7%A-
0.49B
D/E
0.33B
23.0xB+
P/E
35.9xC+
1.19B+
PEG
2.87C
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
QGEN
MEDP
8% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
26% above
~3%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~20%/yr
+6%
1-yr DCF upside
-37%
+8%
5-yr DCF upside
-21%
+13%
10-yr DCF upside
+10%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
QGEN
Why this score
Buying back stock
MEDP
Why this score
Durable high returns
The companies
QGENQiagen N.V.
Diagnostics & Research · $45.38 · beta 0.61
Why now
Diagnostics & Research · market cap $9.4b. Down 22% from 52-week high of $57.82 — deep drawdown territory. 15 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $47.80 (implying +5% upside).
Moat
Net margin 20% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 11% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 107% 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.
MEDPMedpace Holdings, Inc.
Diagnostics & Research · $612.05 · beta 1.18
Why now
Diagnostics & Research · market cap $17.1b. 10% off the 52-week high of $677.90. Revenue growing +25%, comfortably above the S&P median. 13 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $595.92 (implying -3% upside).
Moat
Net margin 18% 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 144% of net income, helped by cash released from working capital ($120m) that doesn't repeat every year.
Risk
Trailing P/E 36x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
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 QGEN and MEDP diverge
On the headline score the gap is 20.7 points in favor of MEDP. The widest single difference is Growth, where MEDP leads by 38.9 points.
GrowthQGEN 49.4 · MEDP 88.3MEDP +38.9
QualityQGEN 63.5 · MEDP 87.4MEDP +23.9
ValueQGEN 55.7 · MEDP 58.4level
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 MEDP or QGEN the better stock?
MEDP scores higher: MEDP 76.6, QGEN 55.9 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 MEDP and QGEN differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where MEDP leads by 39 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. MEDP also leads quality, while value is effectively level between them.
How are MEDP and QGEN 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.