DHR vs LNTH Stock Comparison
LNTH currently leads DHR in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 60 vs 56. The clearest difference is value, while DHR has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between DHR and LNTH?
LNTH leads the current stock comparison as Lantheus Holdings, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Danaher Corporation vs Lantheus Holdings, Inc.
LNTH leads
LNTH leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 7 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support LNTH, its lead is narrowing, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Danaher Corporation
Lantheus Holdings, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors LNTH over DHR, 60 versus 56 as of Oct 31, 2026. LNTH's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while DHR holds the stronger momentum profile. LNTH also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor LNTH today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. LNTH lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 7 to 4 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Danaher Corporation and Lantheus Holdings, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare DHR and LNTH 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.
- Momentum80 vs 48DHR +32
- Value33 vs 52LNTH +19
- Quality57 vs 73LNTH +16
- Risk Resilience59 vs 72LNTH +13
4 of 6 evidence groups favor LNTH. LNTH’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; DHR keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-30, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-29.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
LNTH's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — DHR and LNTH both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
LNTH (Lantheus Holdings, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
DHR (Danaher Corporation): the counter-case, on momentum, fundamentals, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 32.5% against 3.3%.
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
LNTHLNTH on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
DHRDHR on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
LNTHLNTH on the peer-relative Value factor, by 19 points.
Momentum
DHRDHR on the Momentum factor, by 32 points.
Lower downside
LNTHLNTH on Risk Resilience, by 13 points.
Analyst upside
LNTHLNTH on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | DHR | LNTH | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +0.5% | +8.6% | LNTH has more room |
| Target dispersion | +34.3% | +28.4% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 13 | 6 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor LNTH. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | LNTH | 56 vs 60 |
| Fundamentals | DHRon balance | revenue growth 4.6% vs 2.9%; EPS growth 42.3% vs -37.2%; TTM ROE 8.2% vs 23.3%; gross margin 58.6% vs 60.1%; operating margin 20.4% vs 19.4% — DHR takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | LNTH | Value 33 vs 52 |
| Technicals | DHR | Price vs 50-day 6.5% vs 0.2%; vs 200-day 16.2% vs 10.2% |
| Risk Resilience | LNTH | Risk Resilience 59 vs 72 |
| Analyst expectations | LNTH | Target upside 0.5% vs 8.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of DHR and LNTH 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 narrow at 4 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
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 LNTH.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jul 1 – Oct 30LNTH lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 7 to 4 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- LNTH +4
- 56 vs 60
- 7 sessions ago
- LNTH +5
- 54 vs 59
- 30 sessions ago
- LNTH +7
- 53 vs 60
- 90 sessions ago
- LNTH +4
- 55 vs 59
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Oct 1 when LNTH 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.
5 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only DHR
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (2.0%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only LNTH
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (0.43%)
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
DHR is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -2%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.14%, AIQ 0 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 Value gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to LNTH's edge.
- 2DHR's RSI Overbought resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3LNTH's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 4-point move would eliminate LNTH's advantage entirely.
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
DHR leads on balance| Metric | DHR | LNTH |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 4.6% | 2.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 42.3% | -37.2% |
| Gross margin | 58.6% | 60.1% |
| Operating margin | 20.4% | 19.4% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 8.2% | 23.3% |
| Debt to equity | 0.49 | 0.48 |
Performance
DHR leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | DHR | LNTH |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.1% | -0.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 5.7% | 0.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 19.3% | -0.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 29.7% | 23.3% |
| Year to date | 2.2% | 50.4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 5% | 78.6% |
Technicals
DHR has the stronger structure| Metric | DHR | LNTH |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 70.1 | 49.5 |
| ADX (14) | 32.8 | 15.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | 6.5% | 0.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 16.2% | 10.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 32.5% | 3.3% |
Risk
LNTH is the more resilient| Metric | DHR | LNTH |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.45 | 0.59 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.27 | 1.77 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.38 | 2.83 |
| Max drawdown | -33.1% | -12.2% |
| Current drawdown | -3.3% | -9.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 30.1% | 32.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.6% | -2.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, DHR or LNTH?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, LNTH is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 60 against DHR's 56. The edge comes from value and quality. DHR is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 LNTH the better buy right now?
LNTH carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor LNTH over DHR?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. DHR leads Momentum by 32 points; LNTH leads Value by 19 points; LNTH leads Quality by 16 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, DHR or LNTH?
Analyst price targets imply +0.5% upside for DHR and +8.6% for LNTH, so the Street currently favors LNTH. The model and the Street agree here, which is a broader base of evidence than either alone. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, DHR or LNTH?
LNTH is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. LNTH on the peer-relative Value factor, by 19 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 LNTH?
DHR 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 LNTH?
DHR on the Momentum factor, by 32 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 LNTH?
LNTH is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. LNTH on Risk Resilience, by 13 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 LNTH?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 58.6% vs 60.1%; operating margin 20.4% vs 19.4%; ttm roe 8.2% vs 23.3%. DHR leads on one measure and LNTH on two measures, and there is no single profitability composite that resolves the split — which of the two reads as "more profitable" depends on whether you weight pricing power or operating leverage.
Is LNTH's lead over DHR getting stronger or weaker?
LNTH lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 7 to 4 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-07-01 and 2026-10-30. The lead has changed hands 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-01, when LNTH moved ahead of DHR.
What would change the DHR vs LNTH verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: DHR closes the Value gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to LNTH's edge; DHR's RSI Overbought resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; LNTH's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 4-point move would eliminate LNTH's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about DHR and LNTH?
DHR: 5 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. LNTH: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. 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 Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On LNTH it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare DHR and LNTH 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.