LNTH vs PRGO Stock Comparison
Compare LNTH and PRGO across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between LNTH and PRGO?
LNTH leads the current stock comparison as Lantheus Holdings, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Lantheus Holdings, Inc. vs Perrigo Company plc
LNTH leads
LNTH leads by 10 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience, and the lead has widened from 2 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors PRGO on target upside.
Competitive: 3 of 6 evidence groups support LNTH, its lead is widening, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Lantheus Holdings, Inc.
Perrigo Company plc
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors LNTH over PRGO, 61 versus 51 as of Sep 11, 2026. LNTH's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while PRGO holds the stronger value profile. LNTH also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors PRGO. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor LNTH today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. LNTH lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 2 to 10 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Lantheus Holdings, Inc. and Perrigo Company plc 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 LNTH and PRGO 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.
- Quality73 vs 25LNTH +48
- Risk Resilience69 vs 44LNTH +25
- Value53 vs 74PRGO +21
- Momentum50 vs 60PRGO +10
3 of 6 evidence groups favor LNTH. LNTH’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; PRGO keeps a meaningful value 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 -1
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -6
No new signals fired.
LNTH's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — LNTH and PRGO both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
LNTH (Lantheus Holdings, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
PRGO (Perrigo Company plc): the counter-case, on value, momentum, valuation — but at materially higher volatility, 45.8% against 5.2%.
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
LNTHLNTH on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
PRGOPRGO on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
PRGOPRGO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 21 points.
Momentum
PRGOPRGO on the Momentum factor, by 10 points.
Lower downside
LNTHLNTH on Risk Resilience, by 25 points.
Analyst upside
PRGOPRGO on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors LNTH, analyst targets favor PRGO. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | LNTH | PRGO | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +6.8% | +46.4% | PRGO has more room |
| Target dispersion | +29% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 7 | 1 | 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 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 | 61 vs 51 |
| Fundamentals | LNTHon balance | revenue growth 2.9% vs 5.5%; EPS growth -37.2% vs 118.8%; TTM ROE 23.3% vs -56%; gross margin 60.1% vs 33.3%; operating margin 19.4% vs 5.2% — LNTH takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | PRGO | Value 53 vs 74 |
| Technicals | PRGO | Price vs 50-day -2.2% vs 12.1%; vs 200-day 18.3% vs 11.2% |
| Risk Resilience | LNTH | Risk Resilience 69 vs 44 |
| Analyst expectations | PRGO | Target upside 6.8% vs 46.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of LNTH and PRGO and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is moderate at 10 points.
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10LNTH lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 2 to 10 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- LNTH +10
- 61 vs 51
- 7 sessions ago
- LNTH +5
- 61 vs 56
- 30 sessions ago
- LNTH +2
- 58 vs 56
- 90 sessions ago
- LNTH +7
- 59 vs 52
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Aug 24 when LNTH moved ahead of PRGO.
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 / 0 bearish / 2 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (20.74%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (0.96%)
0 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.26%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.51%)
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 -0.14%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.52%, 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.
- 1PRGO closes the Quality gap — currently 48 points behind, the largest single contributor to LNTH's edge.
- 2PRGO's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3LNTH's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 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
LNTH leads on balance| Metric | LNTH | PRGO |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 2.9% | 5.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -37.2% | 118.8% |
| Gross margin | 60.1% | 33.3% |
| Operating margin | 19.4% | 5.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 23.3% | -56% |
| Debt to equity | 0.48 | 1.31 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | LNTH | PRGO |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.4% | -6.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.3% | 7.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 0.1% | 21.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 21.5% | 38.5% |
| Year to date | 50.8% | -2.4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 87.2% | -39.1% |
Technicals
PRGO has the stronger structure| Metric | LNTH | PRGO |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 52.1 | 48.7 |
| ADX (14) | 10.1 | 42.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -2.2% | 12.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 18.3% | 11.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 5.2% | 45.8% |
Risk
LNTH is the more resilient| Metric | LNTH | PRGO |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.59 | 1.02 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.79 | -0.69 |
| Sortino ratio | 3 | -0.95 |
| Max drawdown | -12.2% | -59% |
| Current drawdown | -9.5% | -39.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 35% | 55% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.9% | -4.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, LNTH or PRGO?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, LNTH is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 61 against PRGO's 51. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. PRGO is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 LNTH or PRGO the better buy right now?
LNTH carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor LNTH over PRGO?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. LNTH leads Quality by 48 points; LNTH leads Risk Resilience by 25 points; PRGO leads Value by 21 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, LNTH or PRGO?
Analyst price targets imply +6.8% upside for LNTH and +46.4% for PRGO, so the Street currently favors PRGO. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors LNTH. 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, LNTH or PRGO?
PRGO is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. PRGO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 21 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, LNTH or PRGO?
PRGO 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, LNTH or PRGO?
PRGO on the Momentum factor, by 10 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, LNTH or PRGO?
LNTH is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. LNTH on Risk Resilience, by 25 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 LNTH more profitable than PRGO?
LNTH leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 60.1% vs 33.3%; operating margin 19.4% vs 5.2%; ttm roe 23.3% vs -56%.
Is LNTH's lead over PRGO getting stronger or weaker?
LNTH lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 2 to 10 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-24, when LNTH moved ahead of PRGO.
What would change the LNTH vs PRGO verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: PRGO closes the Quality gap — currently 48 points behind, the largest single contributor to LNTH's edge; PRGO's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; LNTH's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; 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 LNTH and PRGO?
LNTH: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral. PRGO: 0 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral. The most decision-relevant rule on LNTH is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On PRGO it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare LNTH and PRGO 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.