The structural profiles are close, with Qiagen carrying a narrow edge on growth. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals still has the edge on valuation, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. In the market, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals carries the stronger setup — intact trend against Qiagen's broken trend. That leaves a split case: the structural lead stays with Qiagen, but the market is not currently confirming it.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
The lead is spread across growth and stability, rather than sitting in one isolated gap.
This pair is matched through long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.
This level of similarity points to a meaningful structural match, though not a tight one.
Most of the shared profile comes through operating margin level and revenue stability.
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.
Qiagen N.V. looks stronger, but the price setup still looks more supportive for Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc..
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
Earnings growth is one contributing factor within the growth lead.
There is still a strong counterforce in valuation, so the lead stays clear without becoming a sweep.
The lead is built on both growth and valuation — though valuation still provides a counterweight.
Break down the QIA.DE vs REGN comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how QIA.DE and REGN 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.