Looking up the ticker with the regulator···
0s · usually 20–30 seconds for a cold read
Looking up the ticker with the regulator···
0s · usually 20–30 seconds for a cold read
Abbott Laboratories
Rule-based classification of fundamentals against the sector. Not a price forecast and not investment advice.
Lower valuation, weak fundamentals
Get notified when we ship meaningful updates. No spam, no daily noise.
2 of 5 met · composite in line with peers
Business quality, valuation against the sector, and position in the 52-week range — whether they line up or not.
Stable quality
Profitability
3/4
Debt & liquidity
2/3
Efficiency
1/2
Debt/EBITDA of 1.0× sits -66% below the sector median 3.1×, and the current ratio of 1.58 runs above its median 1.40 — the balance sheet is the clearest point of strength here. Beyond that, the picture is more mixed: ROE of 13.1% trails the sector median 26.6% by -51%, and EPS growth of -51.3% runs -801% below the median 7.3%, a gap that weighs on the F-Score of 6/9. Valuation sits near the sector middle — the P/E of 32.5× compares to a sector median of 30.9× — so there is no obvious discount to offset the weaker returns. The forward picture adds further caution: consensus models earnings growth, but the realized three-year EPS CAGR per SEC filings is weak, and the beat rate over eight quarters has been below par, making the market's forward assumptions harder to anchor to the track record.
| Ticker | Name | F-Score | ROE | Revenue YoY | Op. margin |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ABBV | AbbVie | 8/9 | 15 367% |
Quarter-by-quarter classification · a retrospective read by the current logic · not a price forecast
Rule-based classification of fundamentals against the sector. Not a price forecast and not investment advice. The method did not see these quarters in real time; this is the current logic applied to past reports.
The market prices in earnings growth; analyst sentiment is steady; has not always beaten consensus.
Price against next year's expected earnings. The forward P/E already carries analyst optimism — read it alongside the “Versus consensus” line.
A forward P/E below the current one means the market expects earnings to grow; above it, to fall. The historical growth is realized figures from SEC filings, not a forecast.
The three-month change in the share of positive analyst ratings. This is sentiment, not an earnings-estimate revision, and not a call to act.
Revenue and margins in the next quarterly 10-Q will show whether the profitability signals in the F-Score hold. Re-run the ABT analysis once it is published.
The full ABT annual report on SEC EDGAR has the risk factors, the management discussion (MD&A), and the disclosures that numbers alone do not capture.
The same-sector table, where available, is an alphabetical sample with no ranking. Pick 2-3 companies yourself and line up P/E, margin, and F-Score: a single number only means something in its industry context.
Steps you can check yourself, based on the figures in this brief.
Piotroski F-Score: nine binary tests of financial strength from the annual report. A ✓ marks a test passed, a dot (·) a test failed.
Over 4 years: -10%-35%+26%+16%
Over 4 years: 1.511.751.551.04
Over 4 years: +1%-8%+5%+6%
The context on the right shows how each figure compares with the sector median. The trend below tracks the change over recent fiscal years.
Beat consensus in 4 of 8 recent quarters — a mixed record.
Last quarter's EPS against consensus, plus the estimated date of the next report.
| +9% |
| 25% |
| ABT | Abbott Laboratories | 6/9 | 13% | +6% | 18% |
| AMGN | Amgen | 7/9 | 106% | +10% | 25% |
| BMY | Bristol-Myers Squibb | 8/9 | 41% | -0% | — |
| CVS | CVS Health | 6/9 | 2% | +8% | 1% |
| DHR | Danaher | 5/9 | 7% | +3% | 19% |
| GILD | Gilead Sciences | 8/9 | 40% | +2% | 34% |
| ISRG | Intuitive Surgical | 6/9 | 17% | +21% | 29% |
| JNJ | Johnson & Johnson | 4/9 | 35% | +6% | — |
| LLY | Eli Lilly | 7/9 | 101% | +45% | — |
| MRK | Merck | 4/9 | 37% | +1% | — |
| PFE | Pfizer | 5/9 | 9% | -2% | — |
| TMO | Thermo Fisher | 5/9 | 13% | +4% | 17% |
| UNH | UnitedHealth | 7/9 | 18% | +12% | 4% |
A sample of 14 companies in the sector including the target, alphabetical, unranked. Data from the latest SEC annual reports.
Rule-based classification of fundamentals against the sector. Not a price forecast and not investment advice.
A simplified retrospective read: no analyst forecast (not available historically); the source is the annual report as of the date, so neighbouring quarters can rest on the same data. Quarters with the same classification in a row are merged into one row — each row is one change in the read, not a separate quarter. One ticker is an illustration of the classification logic, not statistics. How we calculate →
The last few quarters are recent context, not a fixed rate. Consensus for near quarters is set low, so companies clear it routinely; over long horizons the forecasts run the other way, too high.
A description of what the market and analysts expect. Not a price forecast and not investment advice. Analyst forecasts run systematically optimistic over long horizons — read them with that discount.