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
Get notified when we ship meaningful updates. No spam, no daily noise.
0 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/EBITDA at 4.5× sits +45% above the sector median 3.1×, and that structural weight shows up across the scorecard: the F-Score lands at 5/9, with the efficiency sub-score contributing nothing. ROE of 13.0% trails the sector median 26.6% by -51%, and ROIC of 8.7% runs -25% below the median 11.6% — capital is not being put to work at a rate the sector would call ordinary. FCF growth year over year came in at 0.7%, which is below the sector median -7.7%, though the current ratio of 1.89 holds +35% above the median 1.40, offering some near-term liquidity cover. The forward PEG reads stretched, and with the consensus vs. realized record flagged as mixed, the market's growth assumptions carry the usual optimism risk. The composite of 41/100 against the sector median reflects all of this.
| 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 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 2026-10-20, track whether FCF growth holds above the sector median after its 109% YoY outperformance, and whether Debt/EBITDA — currently 45% above the sector median at 3.06× — shows any reduction. The F-Score efficiency block scored 0/2, so watch asset turnover and revenue-per-asset trends for any directional shift.
On SEC EDGAR, open TMO's most recent 10-K and read the Liquidity and Capital Resources section alongside the Risk Factors. With Debt/EBITDA at 3.06× and FCF yield 14% below the sector median, management's stated debt-reduction plan and capital allocation priorities are worth reading in their own words.
In section 06, pick two or three Health Care companies from the alphabetical table and line up one metric — Debt/EBITDA or FCF yield — against TMO's figures of 3.06× and 3.65%. No company in the table is ranked; the exercise is to place TMO's mixed F-Score of 5/9 in sector context using numbers 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: +5%-13%
Over 4 years: 4.383.664.45
Over 4 years: +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 | 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 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.
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.