Abbott Laboratories vs Eli Lilly
ABT and LLY side by side, both in drugs. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ABT and LLY compare
Eli Lilly is the larger company, worth 7.2 times as much as Abbott Laboratories ($1.4T against $188B).
On earnings, Abbott Laboratories is cheaper: it trades at 40.2× trailing earnings, against 46.9× for Eli Lilly.
Eli Lilly grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (45.5% versus 10.0% for Abbott Laboratories).
Eli Lilly keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 31.9% compared with 9.7% at Abbott Laboratories.
Both pay dividends: Abbott Laboratories yields 2.3% and Eli Lilly 0.46%.
Eli Lilly scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 12 for Abbott 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 | ABT | LLY |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $188B | $1.4T |
| Share price | $108.52 | $1443.50 |
| Change, 1 year | −15.8% | 41.8% |
| Change, 5 years | −14.4% | 454% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.45 | 0.52 |
| Employees | 115K | 50K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 | 19 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Growth score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Performance score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 4 | 4 |
| Dividend score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 40.2× (better) | 46.9× |
| P/S | 3.9× (better) | 15.7× |
| P/B | 3.7× (better) | 33.7× |
| EV/EBITDA | 32.4× (better) | 38.0× |
| P/FCF | 27.8× | – |
| PEG | – | 0.95 |
| FCF yield | 3.6% | – |
| Fair value | $72.76 | $1162.85 |
| Margin of safety | −49.1% | −24.1% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 10.0% | 45.5% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 5.1% | 21.6% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −66.4% | 49.8% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −66.2% | 50.7% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 8.3% | 27.6% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 56.9% | 83.6% (better) |
| Operating margin | 13.8% | – |
| Net margin | 9.7% | 31.9% (better) |
| FCF margin | 14.0% | – |
| Return on equity | 9.2% | 86.1% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 7.1% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.61 (better) | 1.23 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 4.04 | 1.21 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 6.7× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.45 (better) | 1.39 |
| Altman Z-score | 3.36 | 8.65 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.3% (better) | 0.46% |
| Payout ratio | 92.0% | 21.7% |
| Years of dividend growth | 3 | 9 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 15.2% |
| Buyback yield | 0.82% (better) | 0.43% |
| Shareholder yield | 3.1% (better) | 0.89% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 79.8% | 83.8% |
| Held by insiders | 0.50% | 10.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$43.3M (better) | −$373M |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.1% | 0.86% |
Go deeper
- ABT stock overview
- ABT income statement
- ABT valuation and score
- LLY stock overview
- LLY income statement
- LLY valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.