Benchmarks (as of 2024-10-15)

• Performance Comparison:
  • JNJ has generally underperformed XLV over the past three years, with the exception of the shorter periods of 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months.
  • JNJ's performance has been inconsistent relative to XLV, with periods of outperformance and underperformance.
• Risk and Return Analysis:
  • JNJ has provided lower annualized returns than XLV over the past three years.
  • JNJ has generally been less volatile than XLV, as indicated by its lower annualized volatility.
  • JNJ's maximum drawdown of 18.41% is slightly lower than XLV's maximum drawdown of 16.06%, indicating that JNJ has a slightly lower risk profile.
• Risk-Adjusted Performance:
  • XLV has consistently offered a better risk-adjusted return than JNJ, as indicated by its higher Sharpe ratio.
  • JNJ's beta values suggest that it is less sensitive to market movements than XLV, indicating a lower risk profile.
• Overall Assessment:
  • JNJ has underperformed XLV in terms of returns, but it has also been less volatile and has a slightly lower risk profile.
  • XLV has consistently offered better risk-adjusted returns than JNJ, as indicated by its higher Sharpe ratio.
  • JNJ's lower beta suggests that it is less sensitive to market movements than XLV, making it a potentially less risky investment.
  • Investors seeking higher returns may prefer XLV, while investors seeking lower risk may prefer JNJ.

Peers Price History(as of 2024-10-15)

• Performance Comparison: JNJ has shown mixed performance compared to its peers. While it has outperformed MRK in the short term (YTD, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months), it has consistently underperformed both MRK and AZN over longer periods (1 year, 2 years, and 3 years). This suggests that JNJ might be facing challenges in maintaining its competitive edge in the long run.
• Risk and Return Analysis: JNJ has consistently provided lower annualized returns than both MRK and AZN over the past three years. However, it has also exhibited lower annualized volatility, indicating a potentially lower risk profile. The maximum drawdown figures further support this, with JNJ experiencing a smaller maximum drawdown than AZN, but a larger drawdown than MRK. This suggests that JNJ might be a less volatile investment, but it comes at the cost of lower returns.
• Risk-Adjusted Performance: Despite lower returns, JNJ's Sharpe ratio has been comparable to MRK, indicating that it has offered a similar risk-adjusted return. However, both JNJ and MRK have consistently underperformed AZN in terms of risk-adjusted returns. This suggests that AZN has been more efficient at generating returns relative to its risk. JNJ's beta, consistently below 1, indicates that it is less sensitive to market movements than the overall market. However, AZN's even lower beta suggests that it might be even less risky than JNJ.
• Overall Assessment: JNJ appears to be a less volatile investment with a lower risk profile compared to its peers. However, this comes at the cost of lower returns. While JNJ has shown strong short-term performance, its long-term performance has lagged behind its peers. AZN, on the other hand, has consistently outperformed both JNJ and MRK in terms of both returns and risk-adjusted returns, despite exhibiting higher volatility. Investors seeking a less volatile investment with a lower risk profile might consider JNJ, but those seeking higher returns and a potentially higher risk profile might consider AZN.

Peers Fundamentals(as of 2024-09-30)

1. Market Position and Size:

   • Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) is the largest company in the peer group, with a market capitalization of 395,028 million, significantly larger than Merck & Co., Inc. (MRK) at 282,707 million and AstraZeneca PLC (AZN) at 183,709 million. JNJ's market cap is 112,321 million greater than MRK and 211,319 million greater than AZN. This indicates JNJ's dominant position in the market.
   • JNJ's size advantage is reflected in its revenue, EBITDA, and net income. JNJ's revenue of 22,471 million is significantly higher than MRK's 16,156 million and AZN's 10,254.13 million. Similarly, JNJ's EBITDA is significantly higher than its peers, although it is not provided in the data. JNJ's net income of 2,694 million is also higher than AZN's 1,527.26 million, but lower than MRK's 5,455 million.
   • JNJ's size and market position within the peer group are dominant. It is the largest company in the group, with a market cap significantly larger than its peers. This size advantage is reflected in its key financial metrics, further solidifying its dominant position in the market.

2. Profitability and Efficiency:

   • JNJ's Gross Profit Margin of 74.22% is slightly higher than MRK's 73.43% and slightly lower than AZN's 75.69%. However, all three companies significantly outperform the industry average of -804.89%. This indicates that JNJ's profitability is strong, but not necessarily the highest in the peer group.
   • JNJ's EBITDA Margin is not provided in the data, but its size and revenue suggest it is likely to be higher than its peers. JNJ's Net Profit Margin of 11.99% is significantly lower than MRK's 33.76% and slightly lower than AZN's 14.89%. However, all three companies significantly outperform the industry average of -439633.51%. This suggests that JNJ's profitability is strong, but it is not as profitable as MRK, despite its larger size and revenue.
   • JNJ's profitability metrics are strong, but it underperforms in Net Profit Margin compared to both peers and industry standards. This suggests that JNJ may have higher operating expenses or other factors impacting its net income, despite its strong revenue and gross profit margin.
   • JNJ's Return on Average Assets, Return on Average Total Equity, Return on Average Total Capital, and Return On Average Invested Capital are not provided in the data. However, its size and market position suggest that it is likely to be efficient in generating returns.
   • JNJ's efficiency in generating returns is likely to be strong, given its size and market position. However, without specific data on its return metrics, it is difficult to definitively compare its efficiency to its peers.

3. Financial Health and Stability:

   • JNJ's Current Ratio and Quick Ratio are not provided in the data. However, its Total Debt to Total Equity Ratio and Debt / EBITDA are not provided in the data.
   • JNJ's liquidity and debt position are not provided in the data, making it difficult to compare to its peers. However, its large market cap and dominant position suggest that it is likely to have a strong liquidity position and a manageable debt level.

4. Valuation and Market Perception:

   • JNJ's Enterprise Value To Sales of 4.54 is slightly lower than MRK's 4.56 and slightly higher than AZN's 4.74. However, all three companies significantly outperform the industry average of 1223.25. This suggests that JNJ is relatively undervalued compared to its peers and the industry.
   • JNJ's Enterprise Value To EBITDA is not provided in the data. JNJ's Price To Earnings of 27.13 is higher than MRK's 20.67 and lower than AZN's 35.96. However, all three companies significantly underperform the industry average of 163.07. This suggests that JNJ is relatively undervalued compared to its peers and the industry.
   • JNJ's Price to Book Ratio of 5.52 is lower than MRK's 6.49 and slightly lower than AZN's 5.88. However, all three companies significantly underperform the industry average of 11.71. This suggests that JNJ is relatively undervalued compared to its peers and the industry.
   • JNJ's Price To Sales Ratio of 4.54 is slightly lower than MRK's 4.56 and slightly higher than AZN's 4.74. However, all three companies significantly underperform the industry average of 1223.25. This suggests that JNJ is relatively undervalued compared to its peers and the industry.
   • JNJ's valuation metrics suggest that it is relatively undervalued compared to its peers and the industry. This could be due to its large size, dominant market position, and strong financial performance.

5. Cash Flow and Capital Management:

   • JNJ's Net Operating Cash Flow, Total Capital Expenditure, and Free Cash Flow are not provided in the data. However, its size and market position suggest that it is likely to have strong cash flow generation.
   • JNJ's cash flow generation strength is likely to be strong, given its size and market position. However, without specific data on its cash flow metrics, it is difficult to definitively compare its cash flow generation to its peers.

6. Growth and Future Prospects:

   • JNJ's growth metrics show a mixed picture. While it has consistently outperformed the peer group average in Net Income growth, it has consistently underperformed in Sales/Revenue, EBITDA, Free Cash Flow, Free Cash Flow Margin, Total Assets, Book Value Per Share, and EBIT Margin growth. This suggests that JNJ's growth is not balanced across all metrics.
   • JNJ's year-over-year growth rates show significant fluctuations, particularly in Net Income, Basic Earnings per Share, Free Cash Flow, Free Cash Flow Margin, and EBIT Margin. This suggests that JNJ's growth is not consistent and may be subject to external factors or internal strategic shifts.
   • JNJ's 3-year and 5-year CAGR figures show a similar trend. While its 5-year CAGR for EBIT Margin is higher than its 3-year CAGR, its 3-year and 5-year CAGRs for Sales/Revenue and Net Income are lower than the peer group average. This suggests that JNJ's long-term growth is not as strong as its peers, particularly in revenue and net income.
   • JNJ's growth trends suggest that it is facing challenges in maintaining consistent growth across all metrics. While it has shown strong growth in Net Income, its growth in other key areas is lagging behind its peers. This could be due to factors such as increased competition, regulatory changes, or internal strategic decisions.
   • JNJ's growth profile is not balanced across different metrics. Its growth is concentrated in Net Income, while other key areas are lagging behind. This could be a red flag, as it suggests that JNJ's growth may not be sustainable in the long term.

7. Potential for Investment:

   • JNJ's investment attractiveness is mixed. Its large size, dominant market position, and undervalued valuation are potential advantages. However, its lagging growth, lower profitability compared to MRK, and limited data availability are potential disadvantages. Investors should carefully consider these factors before making an investment decision.

8. Key Risks and Considerations:

   • JNJ's lagging growth in key areas, such as sales and free cash flow, could indicate challenges in maintaining its competitive edge.
   • JNJ's lower profitability compared to MRK, despite its larger size and revenue, suggests that it may have higher operating expenses or other factors impacting its net income.
   • The lack of data on JNJ's key financial metrics, such as EBITDA Margin, Return on Average Assets, and Return on Average Total Equity, makes it difficult to fully assess its financial health and performance.

9. Overall Assessment:

   • Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) is a financially strong company with a dominant market position. However, it faces challenges in maintaining consistent growth and profitability. Its large size, strong revenue generation, and undervalued valuation are key strengths. However, its lagging growth in key areas, lower profitability compared to MRK, and limited data availability are areas of concern. Investors should carefully consider these factors before making an investment decision.