JNJ Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Biogen has a net margin of 50.24% compared to Johnson & Johnson's net margin of 10.87%. Johnson & Johnson's return on equity of 19.98% beat Biogen's return on equity of 10.33%.

Johnson & Johnson has a consensus price target of $169.38, signalling upside risk potential of 7.37%. On the other hand Biogen has an analysts' consensus of $191.53 which suggests that it could grow by 61.1%. Given that Biogen has higher upside potential than Johnson & Johnson, analysts believe Biogen is more attractive than Johnson & Johnson.

Johnson & Johnson has a beta of 0.490, which suggesting that the stock is 50.995% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Biogen has a beta of 0.057, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 94.303%.

Johnson & Johnson has a quarterly dividend of $1.24 per share corresponding to a yield of 3.14%. Biogen offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Johnson & Johnson pays 84.05% of its earnings as a dividend. Biogen pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend. Johnson & Johnson's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Johnson & Johnson quarterly revenues are $21.9B, which are larger than Biogen quarterly revenues of $2.5B. Johnson & Johnson's net income of $11B is higher than Biogen's net income of $266.7M. Notably, Johnson & Johnson's price-to-earnings ratio is 17.55x while Biogen's PE ratio is 10.62x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Johnson & Johnson is 4.28x versus 1.79x for Biogen. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Gilead Sciences has a net margin of 50.24% compared to Johnson & Johnson's net margin of 23.56%. Johnson & Johnson's return on equity of 19.98% beat Gilead Sciences's return on equity of 2.5%.

Johnson & Johnson has a consensus price target of $169.38, signalling upside risk potential of 7.37%. On the other hand Gilead Sciences has an analysts' consensus of $113.74 which suggests that it could grow by 7.8%. Given that Gilead Sciences has higher upside potential than Johnson & Johnson, analysts believe Gilead Sciences is more attractive than Johnson & Johnson.

Johnson & Johnson has a beta of 0.490, which suggesting that the stock is 50.995% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Gilead Sciences has a beta of 0.322, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 67.831%.

Johnson & Johnson has a quarterly dividend of $1.24 per share corresponding to a yield of 3.14%. Gilead Sciences offers a yield of 2.94% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.79 per share. Johnson & Johnson pays 84.05% of its earnings as a dividend. Gilead Sciences pays out 816.25% of its earnings as a dividend. Johnson & Johnson's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future, but Gilead Sciences's is not.

Johnson & Johnson quarterly revenues are $21.9B, which are larger than Gilead Sciences quarterly revenues of $7.6B. Johnson & Johnson's net income of $11B is higher than Gilead Sciences's net income of $1.8B. Notably, Johnson & Johnson's price-to-earnings ratio is 17.55x while Gilead Sciences's PE ratio is 285.16x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Johnson & Johnson is 4.28x versus 4.62x for Gilead Sciences. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Intuitive Surgical has a net margin of 50.24% compared to Johnson & Johnson's net margin of 28.41%. Johnson & Johnson's return on equity of 19.98% beat Intuitive Surgical's return on equity of 15.6%.

Johnson & Johnson has a consensus price target of $169.38, signalling upside risk potential of 7.37%. On the other hand Intuitive Surgical has an analysts' consensus of $614.67 which suggests that it could grow by 28.39%. Given that Intuitive Surgical has higher upside potential than Johnson & Johnson, analysts believe Intuitive Surgical is more attractive than Johnson & Johnson.

Johnson & Johnson has a beta of 0.490, which suggesting that the stock is 50.995% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Intuitive Surgical has a beta of 1.555, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 55.506%.

Johnson & Johnson has a quarterly dividend of $1.24 per share corresponding to a yield of 3.14%. Intuitive Surgical offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Johnson & Johnson pays 84.05% of its earnings as a dividend. Intuitive Surgical pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend. Johnson & Johnson's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Johnson & Johnson quarterly revenues are $21.9B, which are larger than Intuitive Surgical quarterly revenues of $2.4B. Johnson & Johnson's net income of $11B is higher than Intuitive Surgical's net income of $685.7M. Notably, Johnson & Johnson's price-to-earnings ratio is 17.55x while Intuitive Surgical's PE ratio is 74.69x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Johnson & Johnson is 4.28x versus 20.75x for Intuitive Surgical. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Moderna has a net margin of 50.24% compared to Johnson & Johnson's net margin of -117.16%. Johnson & Johnson's return on equity of 19.98% beat Moderna's return on equity of -29.09%.

Johnson & Johnson has a consensus price target of $169.38, signalling upside risk potential of 7.37%. On the other hand Moderna has an analysts' consensus of $50.92 which suggests that it could grow by 97.82%. Given that Moderna has higher upside potential than Johnson & Johnson, analysts believe Moderna is more attractive than Johnson & Johnson.

Johnson & Johnson has a beta of 0.490, which suggesting that the stock is 50.995% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Moderna has a beta of 2.231, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 123.128%.

Johnson & Johnson has a quarterly dividend of $1.24 per share corresponding to a yield of 3.14%. Moderna offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Johnson & Johnson pays 84.05% of its earnings as a dividend. Moderna pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend. Johnson & Johnson's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Johnson & Johnson quarterly revenues are $21.9B, which are larger than Moderna quarterly revenues of $956M. Johnson & Johnson's net income of $11B is higher than Moderna's net income of -$1.1B. Notably, Johnson & Johnson's price-to-earnings ratio is 17.55x while Moderna's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Johnson & Johnson is 4.28x versus 3.12x for Moderna. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.