Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to LivaNova PLC
How LivaNova PLC stacks up
LIVN · against 1,216 other Healthcare companies
Growth
82/ 100
Near the top of its peers.
Ranked #214 of 1,217 · scores higher than 82% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the growth score122 peers with a growth score of 80–89, including LIVN · Click a bar to see the companies
Why growth scores 82?
Weighted metrics compared with all Healthcare companies.Mainly thanks to its earnings per share growth, revenue growth and 3-year revenue growth, which are stronger than most Healthcare peers.
- faster revenue growth over three years: stronger than 64% of peers. 3-year revenue growth: 10.7% vs peer median 5.8%
- faster revenue growth over the last year: stronger than 67% of peers. Revenue growth: 12.4% vs peer median 6.1%
- Earnings per share turned from a loss to a profit. Earnings per share growth: — vs peer median 9.8%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = LIVN, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | LIVN | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue growthHigher is better · 1,243 reported | 12.4% | 6.1% | 67% | 33% | |
| Earnings per share growthHigher is better · 682 reported | Not reported | 9.7% | — | — | 33% |
| 3-year revenue growthHigher is better · 1,192 reported | 10.7% | 5.8% | 64% | 33% |
A metric that is not reported is left out of the score; the other weights are rescaled.
Ranking by growth score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around LIVN| Rank | Company | Market cap | Growth | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 3.1B EUR (≈$3.4B) | 100 | 100 | |
| 1 | 464M USD | 100 | 53 | |
| 3 | 8.9B HKD (≈$1.1B) | 99 | 61 | |
| 3 | 1.8B HKD (≈$224M) | 99 | 59 | |
| 3 | 7.2B TWD (≈$224M) | 99 | 41 | |
| 214 | 23.5B USD | 82 | 27 | |
| 214 |
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