DHR vs ILMN Stock Comparison
Compare DHR and ILMN across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between DHR and ILMN?
ILMN leads the current stock comparison as Illumina, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Danaher Corporation vs Illumina, Inc.
ILMN leads
ILMN leads by 7 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Quality, having only recently taken the lead back from DHR. Wall Street currently favors DHR on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support ILMN, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Danaher Corporation
Illumina, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ILMN over DHR, 49 versus 42 as of Sep 11, 2026. ILMN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and quality, while DHR holds the stronger risk resilience profile. ILMN also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors DHR. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ILMN today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. ILMN lead: Reversed — DHR led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; ILMN now leads by 7.
Compare Danaher Corporation and Illumina, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price-return comparison using available daily close history.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000
Based on available close-price history. Distribution reinvestment is not added unless already reflected in the source series.
Compare DHR and ILMN against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
AIQ Factor Divergence
Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.
- Momentum19 vs 47ILMN +28
- Quality56 vs 78ILMN +22
- Risk Resilience59 vs 40DHR +19
- Value37 vs 26DHR +11
3 of 6 evidence groups favor ILMN. ILMN’s edge is concentrated in momentum and quality; DHR keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Momentum -29
New signals
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -9
No new signals fired.
ILMN's lead widened by 5 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — DHR and ILMN both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ILMN (Illumina, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and quality.
DHR (Danaher Corporation): the counter-case, on risk resilience, value, valuation.
The AIQ Score and Wall Street therefore point in different directions on this pair.
Which one fits your objective
The same two names rank differently depending on what you are optimizing for. All six reads are shown at once — none of them is hidden behind a toggle.
Balanced
ILMNILMN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
ILMNILMN on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
DHRDHR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 points.
Momentum
ILMNILMN on the Momentum factor, by 28 points.
Lower downside
DHRDHR on Risk Resilience, by 19 points.
Analyst upside
DHRDHR on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors ILMN, analyst targets favor DHR. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | DHR | ILMN | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +9.9% | -8.8% | DHR has more room |
| Target dispersion | +24.6% | +60% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 12 | 8 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
The two are measuring different things. The AIQ Score reads current fundamentals, valuation, trend and risk; analyst targets price forward expectations. A divergence of this kind is either a contrarian opportunity or a sign the model is missing something already priced in — it is worth resolving before acting on either.
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ILMN. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | ILMN | 42 vs 49 |
| Fundamentals | ILMN | revenue growth 5.3% vs 6.2%; EPS growth -15.2% vs 55.7%; TTM ROE 7.7% vs 31.1%; gross margin 58.5% vs 66.8%; operating margin 20.4% vs 21% |
| Valuation | DHR | Value 37 vs 26 |
| Technicals | ILMN | Price vs 50-day -1% vs 3.3%; vs 200-day -1% vs 31.4% |
| Risk Resilience | DHR | Risk Resilience 59 vs 40 |
| Analyst expectations | DHR | Target upside 9.9% vs -8.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of DHR and ILMN and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is moderate at 7 points.
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on ILMN.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10ILMN lead: Reversed — DHR led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; ILMN now leads by 7.
- Today
- ILMN +7
- 42 vs 49
- 7 sessions ago
- ILMN +3
- 53 vs 56
- 30 sessions ago
- DHR +2
- 55 vs 53
- 90 sessions ago
- ILMN +5
- 54 vs 59
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Aug 21 when ILMN moved ahead of DHR.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
2 bullish / 3 bearish, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.14%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (30.49%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
ILMN leads the comparison while carrying a conflicted signal state, which is one reason the stability rating is not higher.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -0.19%, AIQ -7 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +2.57%, AIQ -2 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1DHR closes the Momentum gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to ILMN's edge.
- 2DHR's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3ILMN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Fundamentals
ILMN leads on balance| Metric | DHR | ILMN |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 5.3% | 6.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -15.2% | 55.7% |
| Gross margin | 58.5% | 66.8% |
| Operating margin | 20.4% | 21% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 7.7% | 31.1% |
| Debt to equity | 0.51 | 0.89 |
Performance
ILMN leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | DHR | ILMN |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -4.5% | -5.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -2.6% | 4.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 9.2% | 23.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 2.8% | 65.7% |
| Year to date | -12.4% | 53.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 1% | 105% |
Technicals
ILMN has the stronger structure| Metric | DHR | ILMN |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 26.4 | 41.5 |
| ADX (14) | 17 | 23.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1% | 3.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | -1% | 31.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 30.5% | 51.9% |
Risk
DHR is the more resilient| Metric | DHR | ILMN |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.43 | 0.85 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.13 | 1.63 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.2 | 3.38 |
| Max drawdown | -33.1% | -25.7% |
| Current drawdown | -17.1% | -11.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 31.5% | 48.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.6% | -3.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, DHR or ILMN?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ILMN is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 49 against DHR's 42. The edge comes from momentum and quality. DHR is not without a case — it holds the better risk resilience profile, which matters more if that is the objective you are optimizing for. This is a systematic score, not a recommendation: it ranks the two on the same evidence, it does not know your holding period or tax position.
Is DHR or ILMN the better buy right now?
ILMN carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor ILMN over DHR?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. ILMN leads Momentum by 28 points; ILMN leads Quality by 22 points; DHR leads Risk Resilience by 19 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, DHR or ILMN?
Analyst price targets imply +9.9% upside for DHR and -8.8% for ILMN, so the Street currently favors DHR. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors ILMN. The two are measuring different things: the model reads current fundamentals, valuation, trend and risk; the Street is pricing forward expectations. A divergence of this kind is either a contrarian opportunity or a sign the model is missing something the analysts have already priced — it is the single most useful row on this page to investigate. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, DHR or ILMN?
DHR is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. DHR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 points. The Value factor reads valuation relative to sector peers and to the company's own fundamental quality, so it is not the same as simply having the lower multiple.
Which has stronger growth, DHR or ILMN?
ILMN on combined revenue and EPS growth. Growth here is measured on reported revenue and earnings, not on forward estimates — it describes what the businesses have delivered, not what the Street expects next.
Which has stronger momentum, DHR or ILMN?
ILMN on the Momentum factor, by 28 points. Momentum is one of the four weighted factors in the AIQ composite. It has documented persistence over three- to twelve-month horizons, which makes it a timing input rather than a reason to hold something indefinitely.
Which is riskier, DHR or ILMN?
DHR is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. DHR on Risk Resilience, by 19 points. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is DHR more profitable than ILMN?
ILMN leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 58.5% vs 66.8%; operating margin 20.4% vs 21%; ttm roe 7.7% vs 31.1%.
Is ILMN's lead over DHR getting stronger or weaker?
ILMN lead: Reversed — DHR led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; ILMN now leads by 7. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-21, when ILMN moved ahead of DHR.
What would change the DHR vs ILMN verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: DHR closes the Momentum gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to ILMN's edge; DHR's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; ILMN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about DHR and ILMN?
DHR: 2 bullish / 3 bearish, conflicted. ILMN: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. A conflicted state means bullish and bearish rules are active on the same name at once — the technical evidence is not pointing one way, and a decision taken on it carries more timing risk. The most decision-relevant rule on DHR is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On ILMN it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare DHR and ILMN with others
Continue your research
This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.