Looking up the ticker with the regulator···
0s · usually 20–30 seconds for a cold read
Looking up the ticker with the regulator···
0s · usually 20–30 seconds for a cold read
Johnson & Johnson
Rule-based classification of fundamentals against the sector. Not a price forecast and not investment advice.
Strong business, valuation above the sector
Get notified when we ship meaningful updates. No spam, no daily noise.
2 of 5 met · composite in line with peers
Business quality, valuation against the sector, and position in the 52-week range — whether they line up or not.
Mixed signals
Profitability
3/4
Debt & liquidity
1/3
Efficiency
0/2
EPS growth of 90.5% — well above the sector median of 7.3% — is the clearest number in JNJ's favor, and Debt/EBITDA of 1.6× sits -48% below the sector median, leaving the balance sheet in a relatively uncrowded position. The F-Score of 4/9 tells a more mixed story: profitability signals hold up, but efficiency scores are absent, and the liquidity sub-score is thin. On valuation, P/B of 8.2× runs +18% above the sector median, and FCF yield of 3.3% trails the median of 3.8% — so the market is pricing in continued strength. The forward PEG reads as stretched, and the beat rate over eight quarters has been weak; per SEC filings, however, the realized three-year EPS CAGR has been strong, which means the consensus optimism may not be as misplaced as the beat record alone would suggest.
| Ticker | Name | F-Score | ROE | Revenue YoY | Op. margin |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ABBV | AbbVie | 8/9 | 15 367% |
Quarter-by-quarter classification · a retrospective read by the current logic · not a price forecast
Rule-based classification of fundamentals against the sector. Not a price forecast and not investment advice. The method did not see these quarters in real time; this is the current logic applied to past reports.
The market prices in earnings growth.
Price against next year's expected earnings. The forward P/E already carries analyst optimism — read it alongside the “Versus consensus” line.
A forward P/E below the current one means the market expects earnings to grow; above it, to fall. The historical growth is realized figures from SEC filings, not a forecast.
A description of what the market and analysts expect. Not a price forecast and not investment advice. Analyst forecasts run systematically optimistic over long horizons — read them with that discount.
When JNJ reports on October 13, 2026, track revenue year over year against the sector median and check whether EPS growth holds near its current 7.32% pace. Also watch FCF growth, which sits 257% above the sector median despite being negative — a reversal into positive territory would strengthen the F-Score's profitability signals.
JNJ's F-Score flags weak efficiency (0/2) and leverage and liquidity pressure (1/3), so focus on management's discussion of cash conversion and debt obligations relative to its 3.06× Debt/EBITDA. The P/B of 6.97× — 18% above the sector median — warrants reading the intangibles and goodwill disclosures to assess what is priced in.
From the alphabetical same-sector table in section 06, pick two or three companies and line up one metric — FCF yield or P/B, for instance. JNJ's FCF yield of 3.78% runs 12% below the sector median, so placing it alongside a handful of peers you choose will give you a clearer sense of where it sits in the range without relying on a single reference point.
Steps you can check yourself, based on the figures in this brief.
Piotroski F-Score: nine binary tests of financial strength from the annual report. A ✓ marks a test passed, a dot (·) a test failed.
Over 4 years: -13%+6%+9%-1%
Over 4 years: 1.271.141.261.61
Over 4 years: +2%+6%+4%+6%
The context on the right shows how each figure compares with the sector median. The trend below tracks the change over recent fiscal years.
Beat consensus in 7 of 8 recent quarters — the company clears estimates regularly (consensus is often set conservatively).
Last quarter's EPS against consensus, plus the estimated date of the next report.
| +9% |
| 25% |
| ABT | Abbott | 6/9 | 13% | +6% | 18% |
| AMGN | Amgen | 7/9 | 106% | +10% | 25% |
| BMY | Bristol-Myers Squibb | 8/9 | 41% | -0% | — |
| CVS | CVS Health | 6/9 | 2% | +8% | 1% |
| DHR | Danaher | 5/9 | 7% | +3% | 19% |
| GILD | Gilead Sciences | 8/9 | 40% | +2% | 34% |
| ISRG | Intuitive Surgical | 6/9 | 17% | +21% | 29% |
| JNJ | Johnson & Johnson | 4/9 | 35% | +6% | — |
| LLY | Eli Lilly | 7/9 | 101% | +45% | — |
| MRK | Merck | 4/9 | 37% | +1% | — |
| PFE | Pfizer | 5/9 | 9% | -2% | — |
| TMO | Thermo Fisher | 5/9 | 13% | +4% | 17% |
| UNH | UnitedHealth | 7/9 | 18% | +12% | 4% |
A sample of 14 companies in the sector including the target, alphabetical, unranked. Data from the latest SEC annual reports.
Rule-based classification of fundamentals against the sector. Not a price forecast and not investment advice.
A simplified retrospective read: no analyst forecast (not available historically); the source is the annual report as of the date, so neighbouring quarters can rest on the same data. Quarters with the same classification in a row are merged into one row — each row is one change in the read, not a separate quarter. One ticker is an illustration of the classification logic, not statistics. How we calculate →