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
Merck & Co., Inc.
Rule-based classification of fundamentals against the sector. Not a price forecast and not investment advice.
Weak signals across every dimension
Get notified when we ship meaningful updates. No spam, no daily noise.
1 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
2/4
Debt & liquidity
2/3
Efficiency
0/2
Revenue growth tells the sharpest story here: at 1.3%, it trails the sector median of 5.9% by -78%, a gap that weighs on the composite score of 49/100 against the sector. ROE of 36.9% runs +39% above the sector median of 26.6%, and Debt/EBITDA of 2.8× sits just below the sector median of 3.1× — so the balance sheet is not the problem. The F-Score of 4/9 reflects mixed signals: efficiency sub-scores came in flat, and the last reported quarter showed an EPS miss. On the forward axis, the beat rate over eight quarters is strong, yet the forward PEG reads as stretched — consensus models a recovery that the realized growth record does not yet confirm, and analyst forecasts carry a well-documented optimistic tilt. The P/E of 122.0× sits +308% above the sector median of 29.9×, pricing in a rebound that the current top-line trend has not delivered.
| 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 Merck reports on October 29, 2026, track revenue year over year against the current 5.86% growth rate, which sits 78% below the sector median. Also check whether ROE holds near 39% and whether the F-Score profitability sub-score moves above its current 2/4.
In the annual report, focus on management's discussion of pipeline concentration and patent exposure — factors that bear directly on the P/E of 29.9×, already above the sector median. The Debt/EBITDA of 3.06× is modestly below the sector median, so also review the leverage disclosures for any covenant or refinancing terms.
From the same-sector table in section 06, pick two or three companies and line up one metric — revenue growth or P/E, for instance. No entry in that table is ranked; the exercise is to place Merck's 5.86% revenue growth and 29.9× P/E in context against whichever names you choose.
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: -38%+98%-32%
Over 4 years: 1.512.591.612.84
Over 4 years: +1%+7%+1%
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 | 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 & Co., Inc. | 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.