KMTS Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Azenta has a net margin of -- compared to Kestra Medical Technologies's net margin of -28.21%. Kestra Medical Technologies's return on equity of -- beat Azenta's return on equity of -3.48%.

Kestra Medical Technologies has a consensus price target of $27.50, signalling upside risk potential of 22.11%. On the other hand Azenta has an analysts' consensus of $41.60 which suggests that it could grow by 50.07%. Given that Azenta has higher upside potential than Kestra Medical Technologies, analysts believe Azenta is more attractive than Kestra Medical Technologies.

Kestra Medical Technologies has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Azenta has a beta of 1.638, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 63.767%.

Kestra Medical Technologies has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Azenta offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Kestra Medical Technologies pays -1.99% of its earnings as a dividend. Azenta pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Kestra Medical Technologies quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than Azenta quarterly revenues of $143.4M. Kestra Medical Technologies's net income of -- is lower than Azenta's net income of -$40.5M. Notably, Kestra Medical Technologies's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Azenta's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Kestra Medical Technologies is 22.51x versus 2.10x for Azenta. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Bionano Genomics has a net margin of -- compared to Kestra Medical Technologies's net margin of -48.04%. Kestra Medical Technologies's return on equity of -- beat Bionano Genomics's return on equity of -141.6%.

Kestra Medical Technologies has a consensus price target of $27.50, signalling upside risk potential of 22.11%. On the other hand Bionano Genomics has an analysts' consensus of $7.33 which suggests that it could grow by 94.52%. Given that Bionano Genomics has higher upside potential than Kestra Medical Technologies, analysts believe Bionano Genomics is more attractive than Kestra Medical Technologies.

Kestra Medical Technologies has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Bionano Genomics has a beta of 2.367, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 136.713%.

Kestra Medical Technologies has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Bionano Genomics offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Kestra Medical Technologies pays -1.99% of its earnings as a dividend. Bionano Genomics pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Kestra Medical Technologies quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than Bionano Genomics quarterly revenues of $6.5M. Kestra Medical Technologies's net income of -- is lower than Bionano Genomics's net income of -$3.1M. Notably, Kestra Medical Technologies's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Bionano Genomics's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Kestra Medical Technologies is 22.51x versus 0.16x for Bionano Genomics. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Bruker has a net margin of -- compared to Kestra Medical Technologies's net margin of 2.17%. Kestra Medical Technologies's return on equity of -- beat Bruker's return on equity of 4.53%.

Kestra Medical Technologies has a consensus price target of $27.50, signalling upside risk potential of 22.11%. On the other hand Bruker has an analysts' consensus of $55.13 which suggests that it could grow by 48.4%. Given that Bruker has higher upside potential than Kestra Medical Technologies, analysts believe Bruker is more attractive than Kestra Medical Technologies.

Kestra Medical Technologies has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Bruker has a beta of 1.228, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 22.782%.

Kestra Medical Technologies has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Bruker offers a yield of 0.54% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.05 per share. Kestra Medical Technologies pays -1.99% of its earnings as a dividend. Bruker pays out 26.7% of its earnings as a dividend. Bruker's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Kestra Medical Technologies quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than Bruker quarterly revenues of $801.4M. Kestra Medical Technologies's net income of -- is lower than Bruker's net income of $17.4M. Notably, Kestra Medical Technologies's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Bruker's PE ratio is 71.44x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Kestra Medical Technologies is 22.51x versus 1.63x for Bruker. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Harvard Bioscience has a net margin of -- compared to Kestra Medical Technologies's net margin of -231.19%. Kestra Medical Technologies's return on equity of -- beat Harvard Bioscience's return on equity of -103.83%.

Kestra Medical Technologies has a consensus price target of $27.50, signalling upside risk potential of 22.11%. On the other hand Harvard Bioscience has an analysts' consensus of $3.00 which suggests that it could grow by 703.64%. Given that Harvard Bioscience has higher upside potential than Kestra Medical Technologies, analysts believe Harvard Bioscience is more attractive than Kestra Medical Technologies.

Kestra Medical Technologies has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Harvard Bioscience has a beta of 1.441, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 44.128%.

Kestra Medical Technologies has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Harvard Bioscience offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Kestra Medical Technologies pays -1.99% of its earnings as a dividend. Harvard Bioscience pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Kestra Medical Technologies quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than Harvard Bioscience quarterly revenues of $21.8M. Kestra Medical Technologies's net income of -- is lower than Harvard Bioscience's net income of -$50.3M. Notably, Kestra Medical Technologies's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Harvard Bioscience's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Kestra Medical Technologies is 22.51x versus 0.18x for Harvard Bioscience. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.