Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. RDNT scored 38.0, GMED scored 80.5 — GMED leads.
Compare another set
RDNT
RadNet, Inc.
Diagnostics & Research · Quality-Growth
38
$70.91 · $5.6B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
42.5
GMED 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
Fastest growthRDNT+18.9%
Strongest balance sheetGMED0.02
Highest qualityGMED72 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueGMED-34%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
RDNT
stronger →← stronger
GMED
35
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
72
86
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
88
18
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
82
GMED is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
RDNT
GMED
$236mC
FCF
$746mC+
+18.9%B+
Rev
+16.7%B+
1.57C
D/E
0.02A-
2.5xB+
P/S
—
0.96B+
PEG
1.49B
—
P/E
19.1xB+
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
RDNT
GMED
53% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
34% below
~23%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~1%/yr
-46%
1-yr DCF upside
+28%
-35%
5-yr DCF upside
+51%
-16%
10-yr DCF upside
+91%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
RDNT
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
GMED
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
RDNTRadNet, Inc.
Diagnostics & Research · $70.91 · beta 1.41
Why now
Diagnostics & Research · market cap $5.6b. 17% off the 52-week high of $85.84. Revenue growing +19%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.96 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 8 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $94.63 (implying +33% upside).
Moat
Turnaround / out-of-favor name — GAAP-unprofitable for now, so the durability case is forward-looking: it rests on a recovery (margin normalization, a cyclical upturn or restructuring) or an un-monetized asset (IP / network effects / first-mover position) rather than on current reported results.
Risk
Currently unprofitable (margin -0.9%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk. Beta 1.41 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. 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.
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
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 RDNT and GMED diverge
On the headline score the gap is 42.5 points in favor of GMED. The widest single difference is Value, where GMED leads by 64.2 points.
ValueRDNT 18.2 · GMED 82.4GMED +64.2
QualityRDNT 34.9 · GMED 72.0GMED +37.1
GrowthRDNT 86.5 · GMED 87.8level
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 GMED or RDNT the better stock?
GMED scores higher: GMED 80.5, RDNT 38.0 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 GMED and RDNT differ most?
The widest gap is value, where GMED leads by 64 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. GMED also leads quality, while growth is effectively level between them.
How are GMED and RDNT 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.