Becton Dickinson vs Stryker
Add, change or remove companies; up to four.
KIRA’s take AI analyst
I put Becton Dickinson and Stryker side by side, using each one’s latest annual report. Here is what stands out:
- Stryker is the larger business, with $25.1B of revenue in fiscal 2025 against $21.8B for Becton Dickinson.
- Stryker grew revenue faster (11.2%, against 8.2%).
- Stryker kept more of each dollar of sales as operating profit (19.5% operating margin, against 11.8%).
- Stryker turned more of its sales into free cash flow (17.1% FCF margin, against 12.2%).
- Stryker earned a higher return on the capital invested in it (11.3%, against 5.5%).
- Investors pay more for each dollar of Becton Dickinson’s earnings: a P/E of 59.2x against 31.7x for Stryker.
Who comes out ahead
Of the 11 measures where higher (or lower) is clearly better, how many each company leads.
Becton Dickinson
BDX
1/11
Share count change
Stryker
SYK
9/11
Revenue growth5-year growthGross marginOperating marginNet marginFCF marginReturn on capitalReturn on equityNet debt / EBITDA
Side by side
Best in the row
| Latest fiscal year | BDX FY25 | SYK FY25 |
|---|---|---|
| Size | ||
| Market cap | $54.0B | $118.2B |
| Revenue | $21.8B | $25.1B |
| Free cash flow | $2.7B | $4.3B |
| Net income | $1.7B | $3.2B |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth | 8.2% | 11.2% |
| 5-year growth | 6.3% | 11.8% |
| Share count change | −0.9% | 0.2% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 45.4% | 64.0% |
| Operating margin | 11.8% | 19.5% |
| Net margin | 7.7% | 12.9% |
| FCF margin | 12.2% | 17.1% |
| Return on capital | 5.5% | 11.3% |
| Return on equity | 6.5% | 15.1% |
| Balance sheet | ||
| Net debt | $17.0B | $10.8B |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.4x | 1.7x |
| Dividends and buybacks | $2.2B | $1.3B |
| Valuation & quality | ||
| P/E | 59.2x | 31.7x |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
Ten years
Revenue
Operating margin
Free cash flow
Return on capital
Each company's latest fiscal year; fiscal years end in different months. The best value in each row is highlighted where higher (or lower) is clearly better. Not investment advice.