Is GMED or RDNT the better stock?

GMED scores higher: GMED 79.2, RDNT 56.1 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 quality, where GMED leads by 37 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. GMED leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.

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.

COMPARE · Data as of August 24, 2026

GMED vs RDNT

Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. GMED scored 79.2, RDNT scored 56.1 — GMED leads.

Compare another set

GMED

Globus Medical, Inc.

Medical Devices · Quality-Growth

79.2

$83.80 · $11.3B

fundamentals as of Jun 2026

Score gap

23.1

GMED leads

RDNT

RadNet, Inc.

Diagnostics & Research · Quality-Growth

56.1

$74.69 · $5.9B

fundamentals as of Jun 2026

At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules

Fastest growthGMED+19.7%
Strongest balance sheetGMED0.02
Highest qualityGMED73 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueGMED-12%

Side by side · every name on one set of axes

The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)

GMED

stronger →← stronger

RDNT

Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet

Growthrevenue & earnings expansion

Valuevaluation vs sector peers

GMED is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.

Fundamentals, head-to-head

GMED

RDNT

$756mC+

FCF

$236mC

+19.7%B+

Rev

+18.9%B+

0.02A-

D/E

1.57C

21.4xB+

P/E

—

1.49B

PEG

0.96B+

—

P/S

2.6xB+

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

GMED

RDNT

12% below

Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper

39% above

~2%/yr

Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in

~24%/yr

+7%

1-yr DCF upside

-45%

+14%

5-yr DCF upside

-28%

+24%

10-yr DCF upside

+5%

The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.

Model signals

GMED

No notable signals flagged.

RDNT

Why this score

Diluting shareholders

The companies

GMEDGlobus Medical, Inc.

Medical Devices · $83.80 · beta 0.95

Why now

Medical Devices · market cap $11.3b. 17% off the 52-week high of $101.40. Revenue growing +20%, comfortably above the S&P median. 13 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $103.23 (implying +23% 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 11% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 141% 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.

RDNTRadNet, Inc.

Diagnostics & Research · $74.69 · beta 1.38

Why now

Diagnostics & Research · market cap $5.9b. 13% 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 rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $92.88 (implying +24% 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. 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.

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 GMED and RDNT diverge

On the headline score the gap is 23.1 points in favor of GMED. The widest single difference is Quality, where GMED leads by 37.4 points.

QualityGMED 72.6 · RDNT 35.2GMED +37.4
ValueGMED 73.3 · RDNT 58.1GMED +15.2
GrowthGMED 93.4 · RDNT 86.5GMED +6.9

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.