Head to head
Steris PLC vs Abbott Laboratories
Side-by-side on the measures that matter, with a plain-English read. Full detail: STE · ABT
STE
Steris PLC
209.68+0.49%
1-year price shape — -12% over the period
Quant Rating D · 26/100
vs
ABT
Abbott Laboratories
98.73+0.58%
1-year price shape — -24% over the period
Quant Rating E · 15/100
1-year performance, rebased to 100
Steris PLC edges it on the scoreable measures. Steris PLC has the highest Quant Rating (26); Steris PLC has done best over the past year (-12%); Steris PLC trades cheapest on trailing earnings.
| STE | ABT | |
|---|---|---|
| Snapshot | ||
| Sector | Medical Devices | Medical Devices |
| Last price | 209.68 | 98.73 |
| Change today | +0.49% | +0.58% |
| 1-year return | -12.2% | -24.1% |
| Market cap | $20.44B | $170.84B |
| 52-week range | 193.97 – 267.14 | 81.39 – 130.33 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E (TTM) | 25.63 | 31.95 |
| P/E percentile, own 5-yr range | 11th | 62nd |
| P/B | 2.84 | 3.34 |
| Dividend yield | 1.20% | 2.47% |
| Profitability & growth | ||
| EPS (TTM) | 7.93 | 3.72 |
| Net profit (TTM) | $773.18M | $6.44B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $6.04B | $46.59B |
| Revenue growth (YoY) | +7.3% | +13.0% |
| Gross margin | 44.4% | 56.6% |
| Operating margin | 18.9% | 15.8% |
| Net margin | 13.3% | 11.6% |
| Free cash flow (TTM) | $925.60M | $7.82B |
| Ownership & sentiment | ||
| Institutional ownership | 100.4% | 81.2% |
| Insider activity (12mo) | 24 buy / 26 sell | 36 buy / 12 sell |
| Short interest (% of float) | 2.9% | 1.1% |
| Analyst consensus | 75% buy / 25% hold (4) | 100% buy (14) |
| Analyst price target | $271 (+29%) | $125 (+26%) |
| StockVane view | ||
| StockVane Quant Rating | D (26) | E (15) |
| Company | ||
| Employees | 17,937 | 115,000 |
| Founded | 1985 | 1888 |
▲ marks the more favourable stock(s) on measures with a clear direction (lower P/E, higher yield, higher Quant Rating, better 1-year return). Analyst consensus counts each covering institution once, at its most recent rating. Not a recommendation. Quant Rating method: Data & Methodology.