Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Danaher Corporation
How Danaher Corporation stacks up
DHR · against 24 other Healthcare companies of similar size
Valuation
53/ 100
Near the bottom of its peers.
Ranked #20 of 25 · scores higher than 17% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score6 peers with a valuation score of 50–59, including DHR · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 53?
Weighted metrics compared with all Healthcare companies.Its metrics sit close to the Healthcare norm.
- EBITDA yield is close to the peer norm. EBITDA yield: 4.3% vs peer median 4.0%
- Earnings yield is close to the peer norm. Earnings yield: 2.5% vs peer median 1.5%
- more free cash flow for the price paid: stronger than 69% of peers. Free cash flow yield: 3.4% vs peer median 0.0%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = DHR, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | DHR | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 25 reported | 2.4% | 3.8% | 13% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 25 reported | 4.3% | 6.6% | 17% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 24 reported | 3.4% | 4.9% | 22% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 23 reported | 32.5% | 20.1% | 73% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around DHR| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 177.5B USD | 92 | 71 | |
| 2 | 108.6B USD | 88 | 66 | |
| 3 | 97.5B USD | 87 | 67 | |
| 4 | 126.1B USD | 83 | 62 | |
| 4 | 540.4B BRL (≈$97.3B) | 83 | 64 | |
| 16 | 249.4B USD | 60 | 55 | |
| 17 | 119.1B USD | 59 | 57 | |
| 18 | 189.3B USD | 57 | 45 | |
| 19 | 134.5B USD | 55 | 70 | |
| 20 | 161.8B USD | 53 | 50 | |
| 20 | 258.2B USD | 53 | 47 | |
| 22 | 126.5B USD | 50 | 56 | |
| 23 | 155.7B USD | 47 | 64 | |
| 24 | 207.7B USD | 8 | 18 |
Scores are sector-relative percentiles from the latest snapshot, always calculated against the whole sector: narrowing the comparison group changes who you compare with, not the scores. Missing metrics are left out and the remaining weights rescaled. How we score