The structural profiles are close, with AstraZeneca carrying a narrow edge on profitability. STERIS still has the edge on valuation, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. On the market side, AstraZeneca is in better shape — its trend is intact while STERIS's trend has broken down. That puts structure and market broadly in agreement — AstraZeneca's lead looks more confirmed than conflicted.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
Most of the lead runs through profitability, while valuation acts as a real counterweight.
This pair is matched through long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.
A moderate similarity means the pair is structurally comparable, but not a near-twin trajectory match.
Most of the shared profile comes through revenue stability and margin trend.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
The largest gaps do not all point in the same direction.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
AstraZeneca PLC still looks stronger overall, though current pricing looks more supportive for STERIS plc.
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
Capital efficiency adds support, with a 11.3-point ROIC advantage.
There is still a strong counterforce in valuation, so the lead stays clear without becoming a sweep.
The lead is there, but one opposing signal still keeps the comparison balanced.
Break down the AZN.L vs STE comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how AZN.L and STE each compare against other companies in their peer groups.
Rule-based, descriptive analysis only. Derived from peer percentile dimensions. Not investment advice. Peer groups are determined algorithmically based on structural similarity — not by sector classification alone.
AssetNext scores reflect each company's structural position within its functional peer group — not a ranking against all stocks simultaneously. Peers are identified by similarity across eight financial dimensions, including revenue growth trajectory, margin structure, capital intensity, and earnings stability. A score of 75 means the company ranks in the top quartile within its own peer group, not the entire market.
Four dimension scores drive the overall peer score: Growth (revenue trajectory and expansion dynamics), Quality (margin structure and capital efficiency), Valuation (peer-relative pricing on standard multiples), and Stability (earnings consistency and financial predictability). Each dimension is scored 0–100 relative to the peer group, then combined into an overall peer score using equal weighting.
Scores are recalculated periodically as underlying financial data is updated. All analysis is descriptive and rule-based — AssetNext describes structural realities and never issues buy, sell or hold recommendations.