Which is better, CON or GMAB?

On the Buffett-Fit framework, Genmab A/S (GMAB) currently grades higher than CON — 65/100 (C grade) vs 62/100 (C). That said, "better" depends on which framework you trust — CON wins on Benjamin Graham and Peter Lynch; GMAB wins on Warren Buffett, Philip Fisher, Joel Greenblatt, Charlie Munger, and Terry Smith. The full pillar breakdown is on this page.

Should I buy CON or GMAB?

This page is an educational comparison, not investment advice. Both CON and GMAB are graded against the same Buffett 5-pillar framework (moat, earnings durability, management quality, financial health, valuation) plus six other documented investor frameworks. Read the side-by-side breakdown to see which one matches the criteria you care about most — and always do your own research before making any investment decision.

Is CON better than GMAB for value investing?

The two are close on the headline Buffett-Fit score (62/100 vs 65/100), so "better for value investing" depends on which pillar you weight most. The five Buffett pillars + six other frameworks are broken down side-by-side on this page so you can pick the one that fits your style.

What's the difference between CON and GMAB on Warren Buffett's framework?

Both stocks are evaluated on the same five pillars: economic moat (durable competitive advantage), earnings durability (consistent profitability), management quality (capital allocation), financial health (conservative balance sheet), and valuation (margin of safety). CON currently scores 62/100 (C grade); GMAB scores 65/100 (C grade). The "Where each wins" section on this page breaks down which pillar each stock dominates.

Which has the stronger moat, CON or GMAB?

Moat strength is one of the five pillars in the Buffett-Fit score on this page. CON and GMAB are each scored on ROIC sustainability, gross-margin durability, and qualitative signals like brand strength, switching costs, network effects, and regulatory barriers. The pillar breakdown on this page shows the moat sub-score side-by-side so you can see which one has the more durable competitive advantage.

Which is more undervalued, CON or GMAB?

Valuation is one of the five Buffett-Fit pillars on this page. Both stocks are scored on owner-earnings yield, price-to-intrinsic-value vs the underlying compounding rate, and the margin of safety relative to a conservative DCF. The valuation sub-score in the table below tells you which one currently trades at a more attractive price relative to its underlying business quality.

Are CON and GMAB both Healthcare stocks?

Yes — both Concentra Group Holdings Parent, Inc. (CON) and Genmab A/S (GMAB) operate in the Healthcare sector. That makes this a direct sector-peer comparison, which is the apples-to-apples way to use the Buffett-Fit framework: the score weighs each stock against its sector's specific quality and valuation benchmarks (sector-relative bonus), so the cross-stock comparison isn't distorted by inter-sector base-rate differences.

Is this CON vs GMAB comparison investment advice?

No. This page is an educational pattern-match against documented public frameworks (Buffett, Graham, Fisher, Lynch, Greenblatt, Munger, Smith), not personalised investment advice. The scores reflect how closely each stock matches each framework's documented criteria — they are not buy/hold/sell recommendations. Always do your own research and consult a licensed financial adviser for personalised advice.

Stock comparison

Concentra Group Holdings Parent

Genmab A/S

Scored across Buffett, Graham, Lynch and Greenblatt - plus a side-by-side metric table covering valuation, quality, growth and balance sheet.

CON

Market cap

$3.24B

Sector

Healthcare

GMAB

Genmab A/S

Market cap

$16.5B

Sector

Healthcare

Overall winner

Genmab A/S GMAB

Wins on the combined sum of fit scores across all four strategies. Per-strategy breakdown below.

Fit scores by strategy

Strategy	CON	GMAB	Winner
Warren Buffett	62C	65C	GMAB
Benjamin Graham	78B	64C	CON
Philip Fisher	39D	48D	GMAB
Peter Lynch	37D	25F	CON
Joel Greenblatt	55C	76B	GMAB
Charlie Munger	67C	68C	GMAB
Terry Smith	66C	71C	GMAB

Side-by-side metrics

Metric	CON	GMAB
Market cap	$3.24B	$16.5B
P/E (TTM)	18.6x	6.2x
EV/EBIT	2.6x	12.0x
ROIC (TTM)	60.75%	43.78%
Gross margin	27.79%	93.88%
Net margin	7.97%	18.23%
Revenue CAGR 5y	5.72%	-18.45%
EPS CAGR 5y	-4.2%	-23.48%
Debt / Equity	5.0x	0.1x
Dividend yield	0.96%	0.0%

Where each one wins

The metrics with the biggest gap between the two - sorted so the most decisive edges read first.

CON leads on

Revenue CAGR 5y5.72%vs -18.45%+131%
Dividend yield0.96%vs 0.0%+100%
EPS CAGR 5y-4.2%vs -23.48%+82%
EV/EBIT2.6xvs 12.0x+78%

GMAB leads on

Debt / Equity0.1xvs 5.0x+99%
Market cap$16.5Bvs $3.24B+80%
Gross margin93.88%vs 27.79%+70%
P/E (TTM)6.2xvs 18.6x+67%

More like CON

CON vs IDXX CON vs 7741.T CON vs SUNPHARMA.NS CON vs LMAT CON vs HALO CON vs MTD

More like GMAB

GMAB vs IDXX GMAB vs 7741.T GMAB vs SUNPHARMA.NS GMAB vs LMAT GMAB vs HALO GMAB vs MTD

Read the full Buffett-Brain analysis for CON Read the full Buffett-Brain analysis for GMAB

Related on invest-like

Strongest Moat Highest ROIC Warren Buffett strategy Economic Moat

Key terms in this analysis

ROIC Free Cash Flow (FCF)Economic Moat P/E Ratio Margin of Safety Quality Score

Educational tool. Fit scores are deterministic projections from public financials onto each investor's published criteria - not personal recommendations or advice.

Stock comparison

Concentra Group Holdings Parent

Genmab A/S

Scored across Buffett, Graham, Lynch and Greenblatt - plus a side-by-side metric table covering valuation, quality, growth and balance sheet.

CON

Concentra Group Holdings Parent

Market cap

$3.24B

Sector

Healthcare

GMAB

Genmab A/S

Market cap

$16.5B

Sector

Healthcare

Overall winner

Genmab A/S GMAB

Wins on the combined sum of fit scores across all four strategies. Per-strategy breakdown below.

Fit scores by strategy

Strategy	CON	GMAB	Winner
Warren Buffett	62C	65C	GMAB
Benjamin Graham	78B	64C	CON
Philip Fisher	39D	48D	GMAB
Peter Lynch	37D	25F	CON
Joel Greenblatt	55C	76B	GMAB
Charlie Munger	67C	68C	GMAB
Terry Smith	66C	71C	GMAB

Side-by-side metrics

Metric	CON	GMAB
Market cap	$3.24B	$16.5B
P/E (TTM)	18.6x	6.2x
EV/EBIT	2.6x	12.0x
ROIC (TTM)	60.75%	43.78%
Gross margin	27.79%	93.88%
Net margin	7.97%	18.23%
Revenue CAGR 5y	5.72%	-18.45%
EPS CAGR 5y	-4.2%	-23.48%
Debt / Equity	5.0x	0.1x
Dividend yield	0.96%	0.0%

Where each one wins

The metrics with the biggest gap between the two - sorted so the most decisive edges read first.

CON leads on

Revenue CAGR 5y5.72%vs -18.45%+131%
Dividend yield0.96%vs 0.0%+100%
EPS CAGR 5y-4.2%vs -23.48%+82%
EV/EBIT2.6xvs 12.0x+78%

GMAB leads on

Debt / Equity0.1xvs 5.0x+99%
Market cap$16.5Bvs $3.24B+80%
Gross margin93.88%vs 27.79%+70%
P/E (TTM)6.2xvs 18.6x+67%

More like CON

CON vs IDXX CON vs 7741.T CON vs SUNPHARMA.NS CON vs LMAT CON vs HALO CON vs MTD

More like GMAB

GMAB vs IDXX GMAB vs 7741.T GMAB vs SUNPHARMA.NS GMAB vs LMAT GMAB vs HALO GMAB vs MTD

Read the full Buffett-Brain analysis for CON Read the full Buffett-Brain analysis for GMAB

Related on invest-like

Strongest Moat Highest ROIC Warren Buffett strategy Economic Moat

Key terms in this analysis

ROIC Free Cash Flow (FCF)Economic Moat P/E Ratio Margin of Safety Quality Score

Educational tool. Fit scores are deterministic projections from public financials onto each investor's published criteria - not personal recommendations or advice.