Eli Lilly and Company's functional peer companies ranked by peer score — growth, valuation, profitability and stability compared.
| Comparison | LLY peer score | |
|---|---|---|
|
Eli Lilly and Company vs Intuitive Surgical, Inc.
|
69 | Compare → |
|
Eli Lilly and Company vs AngloGold Ashanti plc
|
86 | Compare → |
|
Eli Lilly and Company vs Meta Platforms, Inc.
|
70 | Compare → |
|
Eli Lilly and Company vs Viking Holdings Ltd
|
70 | Compare → |
|
Eli Lilly and Company vs Gaztransport & Technigaz SA
|
77 | Compare → |
|
Eli Lilly and Company vs Novo Nordisk A/S
|
58 | Compare → |
|
Eli Lilly and Company vs Insulet Corporation
|
50 | Compare → |
|
Eli Lilly and Company vs UCB SA
|
59 | Compare → |
|
Eli Lilly and Company vs NVIDIA Corporation
|
73 | Compare → |
|
Eli Lilly and Company vs DexCom, Inc.
|
69 | Compare → |
|
Eli Lilly and Company vs Microsoft Corporation
|
75 | Compare → |
View the complete Eli Lilly and Company report including all peer dimensions.
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.