COMPARE · Data as of August 27, 2026
QGEN vs RMD
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. QGEN scored 68.3, RMD scored 81.0 — RMD leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. RMD'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.
68.3
$43.74 · $9.0B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
12.7
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
- CheapestQGEN22.2x
- Fastest growthRMD+9.9%
- Strongest balance sheetRMD0.13
- Highest qualityRMD90 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueQGEN-14%
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
RMD
65
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
90
63
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
82
78
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
72
RMD is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
QGEN
RMD
$453mC
FCF
$1.6bC+
+5.7%C+
Rev
+9.9%B
0.49B
D/E
0.13B+
22.2xB+
P/E
22.7xB+
1.10B+
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
QGEN
RMD
14% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
2% below
~2%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~6%/yr
+10%
1-yr DCF upside
-6%
+16%
5-yr DCF upside
+2%
+26%
10-yr DCF upside
+16%
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
RMD
Why this score
- Raising its dividend
- Durable high returns
The companies
QGENQiagen N.V.
Why now
Diagnostics & Research · market cap $9.0b. Down 24% from 52-week high of $57.82 — deep drawdown territory. 14 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $46.07 (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, 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.
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 QGEN and RMD diverge
On the headline score the gap is 12.7 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.
- QualityQGEN 64.7 · RMD 90.3RMD +25.6
- GrowthQGEN 63.1 · RMD 81.6RMD +18.5
- ValueQGEN 78.0 · RMD 72.1QGEN +5.9
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.