Bioventus vs Si-Bone
BVS and SIBN side by side, both in surgical, medical, and dental instruments and supplies. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BVS and SIBN compare
Si-Bone is the larger company, worth 1.2 times as much as Bioventus ($1.1B against $896M).
Si-Bone grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (15.3% versus 3.9% for Bioventus).
Bioventus keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 9.8% compared with −6.9% at Si-Bone.
Bioventus scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 11 for Si-Bone), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | BVS | SIBN |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $896M | $1.1B |
| Share price | $10.66 | $23.44 |
| Change, 1 year | 39.3% | 30.2% |
| Change, 5 years | −24.0% | 10.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.90 | 0.80 |
| Employees | 930 | 376 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 14 (better) | 11 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 13.3× | – |
| P/S | 1.5× (better) | 4.9× |
| P/B | 3.7× (better) | 5.8× |
| EV/EBITDA | 14.0× | – |
| P/FCF | 10.5× | – |
| FCF yield | 9.5% (better) | −0.42% |
| Fair value | $15.96 | $16.34 |
| Margin of safety | 33.2% (better) | −43.4% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 3.9% | 15.3% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 12.1% | 22.3% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 655% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 627% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 68.7% | 79.5% (better) |
| Operating margin | 9.7% (better) | −8.3% |
| Net margin | 9.8% (better) | −6.9% |
| FCF margin | 14.5% (better) | −2.1% |
| Return on equity | 28.2% (better) | −8.3% |
| Return on invested capital | 12.8% (better) | −19.6% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.96 | 0.20 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.44 | – |
| Interest coverage | – | −7.1× |
| Current ratio | 1.68 | 9.15 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.14 | 8.48 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.00% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 0 |
| Buyback yield | −0.32% | – |
| Shareholder yield | −0.32% | 0.00% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 71.2% | 108% |
| Held by insiders | 29.0% | 3.7% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$181K (better) | −$14.6M |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.1% | 10.5% |
Go deeper
- BVS stock overview
- BVS income statement
- BVS valuation and score
- SIBN stock overview
- SIBN income statement
- SIBN valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.