TransMedics vs UFP Technologies
TMDX and UFPT 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 TMDX and UFPT compare
TransMedics is the larger company, worth 1.3 times as much as UFP Technologies ($3.2B against $2.4B).
On earnings, TransMedics is cheaper: it trades at 25.0× trailing earnings, against 31.1× for UFP Technologies.
TransMedics grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (28.5% versus 8.6% for UFP Technologies).
TransMedics keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 19.9% compared with 11.8% at UFP Technologies.
TransMedics scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 14 for UFP Technologies), 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 | TMDX | UFPT |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $3.2B | $2.4B |
| Share price | $91.38 | $305.06 |
| Change, 1 year | −23.3% | 28.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 301% | 339% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.34 | 1.05 |
| Employees | 898 | 4,846 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 15 (better) | 14 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Health score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 25.0× (better) | 31.1× |
| P/S | 4.4× | 3.6× (better) |
| P/B | 5.8× | 4.9× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 21.5× (better) | 24.2× |
| P/FCF | 70.9× | – |
| PEG | – | 1.82 |
| FCF yield | 1.4% | – |
| Fair value | $129.52 | $255.33 |
| Margin of safety | 29.4% (better) | −19.5% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 28.5% (better) | 8.6% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 88.2% (better) | 27.4% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 57.4% (better) | 14.0% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 47.8% (better) | 13.7% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 37.7% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 58.6% (better) | 28.9% |
| Operating margin | 11.9% | 15.5% (better) |
| Net margin | 19.9% (better) | 11.8% |
| FCF margin | 6.1% | – |
| Return on equity | 31.9% (better) | 17.2% |
| Return on invested capital | 2622% (better) | 15.0% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.10 (better) | 0.20 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −3.45 | 0.75 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 3.5× | 14.6× (better) |
| Current ratio | 4.53 (better) | 2.98 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.84 | 9.80 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.00% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 100% | 123% |
| Held by insiders | 3.9% | 4.5% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$4.2M (better) | −$13.6M |
| Short interest, % of float | 26.6% | 12.4% |
Go deeper
- TMDX stock overview
- TMDX income statement
- TMDX valuation and score
- UFPT stock overview
- UFPT income statement
- UFPT valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.