Agilent Technologies vs Bio-Rad Laboratories
A and BIO side by side, both in laboratory apparatus and analytical, optical, measuring, and controlling instruments. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How A and BIO compare
Agilent Technologies is the larger company, worth 4.8 times as much as Bio-Rad Laboratories ($49.9B against $10.3B).
On earnings, Bio-Rad Laboratories is cheaper: it trades at 10.2× trailing earnings, against 34.9× for Agilent Technologies.
Agilent Technologies grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (8.6% versus 1.4% for Bio-Rad Laboratories).
Bio-Rad Laboratories keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 39.5% compared with 19.5% at Agilent Technologies.
Agilent Technologies pays a dividend yielding 0.58%; Bio-Rad Laboratories does not pay one.
Agilent Technologies scores higher on the StockData Score (21 against 11 for Bio-Rad Laboratories), 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 | A | BIO |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $49.9B | $10.3B |
| Share price | $176.95 | $386.00 |
| Change, 1 year | 20.9% | 25.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 7.7% | −50.3% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.03 | 1.03 |
| Employees | 18K | 7,450 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 21 (better) | 11 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 34.9× | 10.2× (better) |
| P/S | 6.8× | 4.0× (better) |
| P/B | 6.8× | 1.4× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 25.4× | – |
| P/FCF | 39.4× | 31.4× (better) |
| PEG | 11.56 | – |
| FCF yield | 2.5% | 3.2% (better) |
| Fair value | $144.17 | $1234.31 |
| Margin of safety | −22.7% | 68.7% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 8.6% (better) | 1.4% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 5.4% (better) | 0.29% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 18.0% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 18.7% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 14.7% (better) | −26.1% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 53.8% (better) | 51.3% |
| Operating margin | 22.2% (better) | −2.4% |
| Net margin | 19.5% | 39.5% (better) |
| FCF margin | 17.2% (better) | 12.7% |
| Return on equity | 21.0% (better) | 14.3% |
| Return on invested capital | 26.4% (better) | −0.72% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.04 (better) | 0.11 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.76 | – |
| Interest coverage | 15.5× (better) | −1.3× |
| Current ratio | 2.05 | 3.18 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 5.85 (better) | 3.50 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.58% | – |
| Payout ratio | 19.9% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 10 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 6.6% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.76% | 0.77% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 1.3% (better) | 0.77% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 92.8% | 83.2% |
| Held by insiders | 0.29% | 54.5% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$702K | −$136K (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 3 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.7% | – |
Go deeper
- A stock overview
- A income statement
- A valuation and score
- BIO stock overview
- BIO income statement
- BIO valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.