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
Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.
Rule-based classification of fundamentals against the sector. Not a price forecast and not investment advice.
Weak signals across every dimension
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
1 signal unavailable
Profitability
3/4
Debt & liquidity
2/3
Efficiency
0/2
Debt is the clearest pressure point here. Debt/EBITDA stands at 4.5×, which is +52% above the sector median 2.9× — a meaningful structural load for a Health Care name where peers carry less. The F-Score of 5/9 out of 5 reflects that unevenness: profitability sub-scores hold up reasonably, but the efficiency component scores zero, and the composite of 41/100 out of 100 sits well below the sector median. P/B at 3.6× is -40% below the sector median 6.1×, which looks inexpensive, yet FCF yield of 3.5% runs -14% below the median 4.0%, so the cash generation behind that price is thinner than the multiple implies. Consensus carries a forward PEG that reads as stretched, and the beat rate over the last eight quarters is weak — the market models recovery that the realized track record has not yet confirmed.
| 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.
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 market prices in earnings growth; analyst sentiment is weakening; 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 TMO reports on July 23, 2026, track whether free cash flow yield moves closer to the sector median (currently 14% below at 4.02%) and whether Debt/EBITDA, at 2.93x against a median roughly half that level, shows any reduction. The F-Score efficiency block scored 0/2, so watch asset turnover and revenue year-over-year for signs of a turn.
On SEC EDGAR, open TMO's most recent 10-K and read the Liquidity and Capital Resources section. With Debt/EBITDA at 2.93x and FCF yield at 4.02%, management's stated plan for debt reduction and capital allocation priorities is the key disclosure to weigh against the mixed F-Score of 5/9.
In section 06, pick two or three Health Care companies from the alphabetical table and line up one metric — Debt/EBITDA or FCF yield works well given TMO's weak signals in both. No single company in the table is ranked above another; the exercise is to place TMO's figures in sector context yourself.
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: +301%+5%-13%
Over 4 years: 3.644.383.664.45
Over 4 years: +227%+0%+4%
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 8 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 | 7/9 | 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 Scientific Inc. | 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.
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.