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
Danaher Corporation
Rule-based classification of fundamentals against the sector. Not a price forecast and not investment advice.
Signals scattered
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.
Mixed signals
Profitability
3/4
Debt & liquidity
2/3
Efficiency
0/2
Capital returns tell the clearest story of the tension inside Danaher Corporation: ROIC runs at 6.0%, some -48% below the sector median, and ROE at 7.1% trails the median by -73% — both weak for a health care name of this scale. The F-Score of 5/9 reflects mixed signals, with the efficiency sub-score the softest component. Balance-sheet health is a genuine offset: the current ratio of 1.87 sits +34% above the sector median, and FCF grew 3.2% year over year against a sector median of -7.7%. Valuation lands near the middle of the sector — the P/B of 2.8× is -54% below the median, which is not obviously cheap given the capital-return weakness. Consensus models earnings growth that the realized three-year EPS CAGR of {{value:eps_cagr_3y}} does not support, a gap that warrants attention given the systematic optimism analysts tend to carry into their forecasts.
| 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 mostly 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.
When DHR reports on October 19, 2026, track whether asset turnover and revenue year over year show any improvement — the F-Score efficiency block scored 0/2, the weakest segment of its 5/9 reading. A move toward sector-median ROIC (DHR sits 48% below at 11.6%) would be the clearest sign the post-spin restructuring is gaining traction.
On SEC EDGAR, open DHR's most recent 10-K and focus on management's discussion of ROIC targets and debt deployment. With ROE at 26.6% — 73% below the sector median — understanding how management frames returns on invested capital will clarify whether the current valuation (P/B of 6.04×, 54% below the sector median) reflects a structural discount or a temporary trough.
From the alphabetical same-sector table in section 06, pick two or three companies yourself and line up one metric — ROIC, current ratio, or FCF growth year over year are the most relevant given DHR's mixed signals. No company in the table is ranked; the exercise is to place DHR's 11.6% ROIC and 1.40 current ratio in context against names you already follow or are considering.
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: +4%-22%-8%-1%
Over 4 years: 1.972.272.783.39
Over 4 years: +7%-10%-0%+3%
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 7 of 8 recent quarters — the company clears estimates regularly (consensus is often set conservatively).
Last quarter's EPS against consensus, plus the estimated date of the next report.
| +9% |
| 25% |
| ABT | Abbott | 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 Corporation | 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.