This comprehensive analysis, updated November 6, 2025, offers a deep dive into AngioDynamics, Inc. (ANGO), evaluating its business model, financial health, and future growth prospects. We benchmark ANGO against key competitors like Inari Medical and Merit Medical Systems, applying the investment styles of Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger to determine its fair value.
Negative. AngioDynamics faces significant financial distress, marked by consistent unprofitability and rapid cash burn. The company lacks a strong competitive advantage, struggling against larger and more innovative peers. Its historical performance has been extremely poor, with stagnant revenue and major losses for shareholders. Future growth prospects are highly speculative and depend on a turnaround that has yet to materialize. The stock appears significantly overvalued, as its current price is not supported by weak financial results. Given the high risk and lack of a clear path to profitability, investors should exercise extreme caution.
US: NASDAQ
AngioDynamics, Inc. is a medical technology company focused on developing and marketing minimally invasive devices for the treatment of vascular disease and cancer. The company's business model is centered on the 'razor-razorblade' strategy, common in the surgical and interventional device industry. It involves placing capital equipment, such as laser consoles or ablation generators, in hospitals and clinics, which in turn generates a recurring stream of revenue from the sale of proprietary, high-margin, single-use disposable products like catheters and probes used in procedures. AngioDynamics' operations are divided into two main segments: Med Tech and Med Device. The Med Tech segment houses its key growth platforms: the Auryon atherectomy system for treating Peripheral Artery Disease (PAD), the NanoKnife system for ablating soft tissue tumors, and the AlphaVac and AngioVac systems for removing blood clots (thrombectomy). The Med Device segment contains a portfolio of more mature products, including ports, catheters, and dialysis products. The company's strategy hinges on driving the adoption of its Med Tech platforms to accelerate growth and improve profitability.
The Auryon Atherectomy System is a cornerstone of AngioDynamics' Med Tech portfolio, designed to treat PAD, a condition where plaque buildup narrows arteries and restricts blood flow, primarily in the legs. Auryon utilizes a unique 355nm wavelength laser that allows it to treat a wide range of blockages, from soft plaque to hard, calcified lesions, including those below the knee, often with a single device. This versatility is its primary selling point. The Med Tech segment, of which Auryon is a major part, generated $153.2 million in fiscal year 2023, representing approximately 46% of the company's total revenue. The global PAD treatment market is valued at over $5 billion and is expected to grow at a mid-single-digit compound annual growth rate (CAGR), driven by an aging population and rising rates of diabetes and obesity. The atherectomy sub-market is intensely competitive, with major players including Boston Scientific (Jetstream, Rotablator), Abbott through its acquisition of Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. (Diamondback 360), and Medtronic (HawkOne). Auryon's key differentiator is its technical ability to treat mixed morphologies of plaque without creating significant heat, potentially reducing complications. The system is used by interventional cardiologists, interventional radiologists, and vascular surgeons. Customer stickiness is created by the initial capital investment in the laser console and the physician's learning curve and comfort with the system's specific catheters. However, the moat is relatively narrow. While protected by patents, the technology must continuously prove its clinical superiority through data from registries like PATHFINDER to win share from competitors who have deeper hospital relationships and much larger sales forces.
Another critical platform is the NanoKnife System, which represents AngioDynamics' primary offering in interventional oncology. NanoKnife utilizes a non-thermal, minimally invasive technology called Irreversible Electroporation (IRE) to ablate, or destroy, soft-tissue tumors. Its unique mechanism of action uses electrical pulses to create microscopic pores in cancer cells, causing them to die without generating heat. This is a crucial advantage when treating tumors near sensitive structures like major blood vessels or bile ducts, where thermal ablation methods (like radiofrequency or microwave) risk causing collateral damage. The system is primarily used for tumors in the pancreas and liver. The market for soft-tissue ablation is a multi-billion dollar industry. NanoKnife targets a high-value niche within this market, particularly for surgically complex or inoperable cases. The main competitors offer different modalities, such as Medtronic and Johnson & Johnson who are leaders in thermal ablation. NanoKnife doesn't compete head-to-head on technology but rather offers a unique solution for specific clinical scenarios. The users are typically interventional radiologists and surgical oncologists at major cancer centers. Stickiness is quite high; IRE requires specialized training, and once a physician becomes proficient, they are likely to continue using it for appropriate cases. The competitive moat for NanoKnife is arguably the strongest in AngioDynamics' portfolio. It is protected by a strong patent estate and, most importantly, by a growing body of clinical evidence. The company is pursuing a Premarket Approval (PMA) supplement based on its DIRECT clinical trial data for treating pancreatic cancer, which could solidify its position as a standard of care and create a significant regulatory barrier for potential competitors.
In the venous thromboembolism (VTE) space, AngioDynamics' key growth product is the AlphaVac F18 Mechanical Thrombectomy System. AlphaVac is designed to remove blood clots from the venous system, including life-threatening pulmonary embolisms. It is an 'all-in-one' device that does not require capital equipment, simplifying its adoption by hospitals. The VTE franchise, which includes AlphaVac and the legacy AngioVac system, contributed $50.2 million in fiscal 2023 revenue. The market for mechanical thrombectomy is one of the fastest-growing in medical devices, with a valuation exceeding $2 billion and a double-digit CAGR. However, this growth has attracted fierce competition. The market is dominated by two focused players: Inari Medical (FlowTriever, ClotTriever) and Penumbra (Indigo System). These companies were early movers and have established strong market positions backed by extensive clinical data and dedicated sales teams. AngioDynamics is a challenger, competing on product features such as AlphaVac's ergonomic design and off-the-shelf availability. The primary customers are interventional cardiologists, radiologists, and vascular surgeons who treat acute VTE cases. Physician loyalty can be strong, but it is primarily driven by clinical outcomes and ease of use. To gain meaningful share, AngioDynamics must demonstrate through clinical trials, like its APEX-AV study, that AlphaVac provides equivalent or superior outcomes compared to the market leaders. The competitive moat for AlphaVac is currently weak. It is entering a market with established incumbents and faces a high bar to prove its value to clinicians and hospitals who are already satisfied with existing solutions.
In conclusion, AngioDynamics' business model is sound, but its competitive moat is a mixed bag. The company's resilience is tied to its three distinct Med Tech platforms, each at a different stage of maturity and facing different competitive dynamics. The NanoKnife system stands out with a potentially durable moat built on unique, patented technology and the pursuit of high-level clinical evidence for difficult-to-treat cancers. This gives it a defensible niche with strong pricing power. In contrast, the Auryon and AlphaVac systems are positioned in much larger, but also far more competitive, markets. Their success is less about a proprietary technological lock and more about commercial execution, clinical data generation, and the ability to effectively challenge much larger and better-funded rivals. The company's future depends on its ability to transition from a collection of niche products to a portfolio of market-leading platforms. This requires substantial and sustained investment in clinical trials and commercial infrastructure, a significant challenge for a company of its size. The overall business model is viable, but its long-term durability is not yet proven and remains contingent on successful execution across these varied and challenging markets.
AngioDynamics' recent financial performance presents a challenging picture for investors. On the surface, the company is demonstrating a rebound in top-line growth, with revenue increasing by 12.18% in the most recent quarter. Gross margins are also respectable for the industry, recently reported at 55.28%. However, these positive indicators are completely nullified by the company's inability to control its operating expenses. Selling, General & Administrative (SG&A) costs consume over half of the company's revenue, leading to substantial and persistent operating and net losses. In the last fiscal year, the company posted a net loss of -$33.99 million, and this trend has continued into the new fiscal year.
The balance sheet reveals a critical duality. On one hand, leverage is exceptionally low, with a debt-to-equity ratio of just 0.05. This lack of debt provides some financial flexibility and reduces interest-related risks. On the other hand, the company's liquidity position is deteriorating rapidly. Cash and equivalents fell from $55.89 million to $38.76 million in a single quarter, a nearly 30% decline. This high cash burn rate, driven by negative operating cash flow, raises serious questions about the company's short-term financial stability.
Ultimately, AngioDynamics is not generating the cash needed to sustain its operations, let alone invest in future growth. The free cash flow for the last fiscal year was a negative -$20.31 million, and the most recent quarter saw a further cash outflow of -$16.65 million. While the return to revenue growth is a necessary first step, it is insufficient on its own. The company's financial foundation appears risky until it can demonstrate a clear path to profitability and positive cash generation by addressing its bloated cost structure.
An analysis of AngioDynamics' performance over the last five fiscal years, from FY2021 to FY2025, reveals a company facing profound operational and financial challenges. The historical record is defined by a failure to achieve consistent growth, an inability to generate profits, and a steady consumption of cash. This performance stands in stark contrast to that of its key competitors, who have demonstrated far greater resilience, profitability, and market execution during the same period.
Historically, the company's growth has been unreliable. After a few years of single-digit growth, revenue fell 10.3% in FY2024, and the trajectory over the five-year window shows near-zero cumulative growth, starting at $291 million in FY2021 and ending at a projected $292.5 million in FY2025. This top-line stagnation is matched by a disastrous earnings record, with negative earnings per share (EPS) in every single year. The company's profitability has been nonexistent, with operating margins remaining deeply negative, ranging from -5.1% to -11.1%. These figures reflect a business that consistently spends more to operate than it earns from its sales, a clear sign of an unsustainable business model when compared to peers like Boston Scientific or Teleflex, which maintain healthy operating margins above 15-20%.
From a cash flow perspective, the company's performance is equally concerning. AngioDynamics has burned through cash in four of the last five fiscal years, with negative free cash flow figures including -$35.7 million in FY2024 and -$22.9 million in FY2022. This inability to generate cash internally from its operations forces the company to rely on its cash reserves or external financing to survive. Consequently, there have been no capital returns to shareholders; the company pays no dividend, and its share count has consistently increased each year, diluting existing shareholders. This contrasts sharply with larger, more stable peers that generate billions in cash flow and return capital through dividends and buybacks.
Overall, the historical record for AngioDynamics does not support confidence in its execution or resilience. The multi-year trend of financial losses, cash burn, and shareholder value destruction—the competitor analysis notes a stock decline of over 90% in five years—paints a picture of a company that has failed to compete effectively in its markets. Its past performance suggests a high-risk profile with no demonstrated ability to generate sustainable returns for investors.
The surgical and interventional device industry is poised for steady growth over the next 3-5 years, driven by powerful demographic trends and technological advancements. An aging global population and the rising prevalence of chronic conditions like peripheral artery disease (PAD), cancer, and venous thromboembolism (VTE) will continue to fuel demand for minimally invasive procedures that offer shorter recovery times and better patient outcomes. A key shift in the industry is the increasing importance of clinical and economic data. Hospitals and payors are demanding robust evidence that new devices not only improve clinical outcomes but also reduce overall healthcare costs, raising the bar for market entry. Catalysts for demand include new regulatory approvals for expanded indications, allowing existing technologies to treat more patients, and the continued shift of procedures from inpatient hospitals to lower-cost ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs). The global interventional cardiology market is expected to grow at a CAGR of ~7-8%, while high-growth niches like mechanical thrombectomy are expanding at rates exceeding 15% annually. The competitive landscape is intensifying, with large-scale players leveraging their vast distribution networks, extensive clinical research budgets, and bundled sales contracts to protect their market share. This makes it increasingly difficult for smaller companies like AngioDynamics to compete, as the barriers to entry are not just technological but commercial and financial, requiring significant investment to build physician trust and secure hospital contracts.
This intense competitive environment puts immense pressure on smaller innovators. To succeed, a company must either possess a truly disruptive technology for a large, unmet need or dominate a defensible niche where larger players cannot easily compete. The industry is also seeing a trend towards creating integrated ecosystems, where capital equipment, disposables, software, and data analytics are combined to create sticky platforms that are difficult for hospitals to replace. This shift disadvantages companies that offer standalone point solutions. Furthermore, supply chain resilience and manufacturing efficiency are becoming critical differentiators. Companies with superior gross margins can reinvest more into R&D and sales, creating a virtuous cycle of innovation and market share gains. For AngioDynamics, navigating this landscape means its growth hinges on its ability to prove the clinical superiority of its key products and execute a flawless commercial strategy against formidable competitors. The company's future is less about broad market growth and more about its ability to carve out and defend its share within specific, highly contested therapeutic areas.
AngioDynamics' Auryon laser system is a key growth driver targeting the peripheral artery disease (PAD) market. Current consumption is driven by interventional cardiologists and vascular surgeons treating complex blockages, particularly hard, calcified plaque that is difficult to address with other methods. However, its adoption is constrained by the deeply entrenched positions of competitors like Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Abbott (which acquired CSI). These companies have vast sales forces and long-standing hospital relationships, making it difficult for Auryon to gain access and convert physicians. Looking ahead, Auryon's consumption is expected to increase among physicians seeking a more versatile tool that can treat a broader range of plaque types with a single device. Growth will be catalyzed by generating more clinical data from its PATHFINDER registry to prove its effectiveness and by expanding into the ambulatory surgical center channel where purchasing decisions can be more streamlined. The global atherectomy market is a segment of the broader ~$5 billion PAD market and is projected to grow at a ~6-8% CAGR. Auryon's market share remains in the low single digits. Customers in this space choose based on clinical evidence, ease of use, and, crucially, existing contractual relationships. AngioDynamics can outperform when a physician is specifically looking for a solution for mixed-morphology plaque, but it is likely to lose out to larger players who can offer bundled deals across a wider portfolio of vascular products. The industry has seen consolidation, and this trend will likely continue, favoring companies with scale. A key risk for Auryon is intense pricing pressure from hospital networks (high probability), which could compress margins. Another is that competitors could launch next-generation devices that match Auryon's versatility, eroding its primary technological advantage (medium probability).
The NanoKnife system is AngioDynamics' most unique asset, operating in the interventional oncology space. Its current use is limited to a niche: ablating soft-tissue tumors located near critical structures where thermal-based methods are too risky. Consumption is constrained by its lack of a specific indication for major cancers like pancreatic cancer, which often limits reimbursement and positions it as a last-resort therapy. The most significant potential change in the next 3-5 years is a dramatic increase in consumption driven by a potential Premarket Approval (PMA) for treating pancreatic cancer, based on the DIRECT clinical trial. This could shift NanoKnife from a niche tool to a standard-of-care option, unlocking a market of patients with limited alternatives. The soft-tissue ablation market is a multi-billion dollar industry; a PMA could expand NanoKnife's addressable market by several hundred million dollars. Unlike Auryon, NanoKnife doesn't compete directly with the market leaders in thermal ablation (Medtronic, J&J); instead, it offers a solution for cases they cannot safely treat. Customers choose it for its unique non-thermal mechanism and safety profile. AngioDynamics is the dominant player in its Irreversible Electroporation (IRE) niche, which is protected by strong patents and the high clinical bar for entry. The primary risk is a negative outcome from the DIRECT trial or the FDA granting a weaker-than-expected label (medium probability), which would severely curtail its growth potential. Another risk is that payors could deny coverage even with FDA approval, citing the need for more long-term data (medium probability).
In the fast-growing venous thromboembolism (VTE) market, AngioDynamics competes with its AlphaVac system. Current consumption is severely limited by the dominant market positions of Inari Medical and Penumbra. These two companies created the market for large-bore mechanical thrombectomy and command the vast majority of market share, supported by extensive clinical data and brand recognition among physicians. AlphaVac's growth is therefore entirely dependent on displacing these incumbents. Over the next 3-5 years, AngioDynamics hopes to increase consumption by positioning AlphaVac as a simpler, more ergonomic, all-in-one device. The key catalyst for any potential share gain is the successful outcome of its APEX-AV clinical trial, which must demonstrate that AlphaVac is at least as good as, if not better than, the market leaders. The VTE mechanical thrombectomy market is valued at over ~$2 billion and is growing at 15-20% annually, but AlphaVac's share is estimated to be less than 5%. Customers choose based on clinical outcomes, safety data, and physician experience. Inari and Penumbra are overwhelmingly winning this battle due to their first-mover advantage and robust clinical evidence. The biggest risk to AlphaVac is that its clinical data from APEX-AV fails to impress physicians or prove non-inferiority to the competition (high probability), which would effectively cap its growth potential. Furthermore, the risk of Inari and Penumbra launching next-generation products that further improve outcomes is high, potentially leaving AlphaVac even further behind (high probability).
Beyond these three core platforms, AngioDynamics' future growth is also influenced by the performance of its legacy Med Device portfolio. This segment, which includes ports, catheters, and dialysis products, provides stable, albeit low-growth, cash flow. The health of this business is critical, as the profits it generates are needed to fund the expensive clinical trials and commercial expansion required for the Med Tech platforms. Any significant decline in this legacy business could constrain the company's ability to invest in its future growth drivers. Another factor is the company's ability to manage its operating expenses. As it tries to compete with larger rivals, there is a constant need to invest heavily in sales, marketing, and R&D. Without a corresponding acceleration in high-margin revenue, these investments could continue to pressure profitability and cash flow, limiting the company's financial flexibility and its ability to weather setbacks in its clinical programs. The company's success, therefore, rests on a delicate balance: achieving clinical and commercial breakthroughs with its Med Tech products before its financial resources are exhausted by the competitive battle.
As of November 3, 2025, AngioDynamics, Inc. (ANGO) presents a challenging valuation case due to its lack of profitability. At a price of $12.14, the stock appears disconnected from its underlying financial health, which is characterized by negative earnings and cash flow burn. A triangulated valuation approach suggests the stock is currently overvalued. A simple price check reveals the market is pricing the company on metrics other than current performance. With a latest book value per share of $4.32 and a tangible book value per share of $2.67, the current price represents a significant premium to the company's net assets. Price $12.14 vs. Tangible Book Value $2.67 → Premium of 355%. This results in a verdict of Overvalued, suggesting investors should keep this on a watchlist until a clear path to profitability is demonstrated. From a multiples perspective, traditional metrics like P/E and EV/EBITDA are not meaningful because both earnings and EBITDA are negative. The most relevant multiple is EV/Sales, which stands at 1.55 (TTM). While this is lower than the US Medical Equipment industry average of 2.8x, it is considered expensive compared to an estimated Fair Price-to-Sales Ratio of 1.3x when factoring in the company's negative profit margins and growth forecasts. Applying a more conservative 1.0x to 1.3x EV/Sales multiple to the TTM revenue of $300.72M would imply an enterprise value of $301M to $391M. After adjusting for net cash of $29.16M, this yields a fair value equity range of approximately $8.00–$10.20 per share, well below the current price. An asset-based approach provides a potential floor for the stock's value. The book value per share is $4.32, and more critically, the tangible book value per share (which excludes intangible assets) is only $2.67. For an unprofitable company, a price-to-tangible-book ratio of 4.55x ($12.14 / $2.67) is exceptionally high and points to significant downside risk if the company's growth story falters. A valuation closer to 1.5x to 2.0x tangible book value ($4.00–$5.34) would be more typical for a company in this financial position. Combining these methods, with the heaviest weight on the sales multiple given its forward-looking nature, suggests a fair value range of ~$7.00–$9.50. This triangulated view reinforces the conclusion that the stock is overvalued at its current price.
Warren Buffett would view AngioDynamics in 2025 as a business that fundamentally fails his core investment principles. His thesis for the medical device industry would be to find companies with strong, durable competitive advantages, like a trusted brand or high physician switching costs, that produce predictable, high returns on capital. AngioDynamics displays none of these traits; its stagnant revenue, negative operating margins, and consistent cash burn signal a lack of both a protective moat and pricing power. The company's significant debt load would be an immediate disqualifier for Buffett, who prioritizes financial strength and avoids speculative turnarounds with fragile balance sheets. For retail investors, the key takeaway is that AngioDynamics is a classic 'value trap'—its low stock price reflects severe underlying business and financial risks, not a bargain on a quality company. Buffett would unequivocally avoid this stock. If forced to choose leaders in this sector, Buffett would prefer dominant, profitable companies like Medtronic (MDT), Boston Scientific (BSX), or even a stable operator like Merit Medical (MMSI) due to their predictable earnings, strong moats, and shareholder-friendly capital returns. A decision change would require years of proven profitability and the emergence of a clear, durable competitive advantage, not just a lower stock price.
Charlie Munger would view AngioDynamics as a clear example of a business to avoid, falling squarely into his 'too hard' pile. He seeks high-quality companies with durable competitive moats, something ANGO demonstrably lacks, as evidenced by its weak gross margins of ~50% compared to the 80-90% of focused leaders like Inari Medical. The company's persistent unprofitability, negative cash flow, and significant debt burden are cardinal sins in Munger's framework, representing a high risk of permanent capital loss. Munger would conclude that the company is being outcompeted by more focused, innovative, and financially sound rivals, making its low valuation a classic value trap rather than a bargain. For retail investors, the takeaway is that Munger would see no reason to bet on a speculative turnaround when superior, cash-generative businesses with strong moats like Boston Scientific, Inari Medical, and Medtronic exist in the same industry. A sustained, multi-year track record of profitability and positive free cash flow would be the absolute minimum requirement for him to even begin to reconsider.
Bill Ackman would view AngioDynamics as a highly speculative turnaround that fails to meet his core investment criteria of simplicity, predictability, and a strong competitive moat. His investment thesis in the medical device sector would focus on companies with dominant platforms, pricing power, and high-margin recurring revenue from disposables, which ANGO currently lacks, as evidenced by its stagnant revenue and poor gross margins of around 50% versus best-in-class peers above 80%. The company's negative EBITDA and significant debt load represent an unacceptable level of risk, especially when it is being consistently out-innovated by more focused competitors like Inari Medical. Ackman would conclude that ANGO is a classic 'value trap' where the low valuation reflects deep-seated structural problems rather than a simple, fixable issue. For retail investors, the key takeaway is that the path to recovery is highly uncertain and fraught with risk, making it an investment Ackman would almost certainly avoid. Instead, he would gravitate towards high-quality leaders like Boston Scientific (BSX) for its scale and predictable cash flows, or Inari Medical (NARI) for its niche dominance and fortress balance sheet. Ackman might only reconsider AngioDynamics if a new management team executed a credible plan to shed non-core assets and achieve sustainable positive free cash flow.
AngioDynamics operates in three primary segments: Med Tech (which includes its Auryon atherectomy and NanoKnife ablation products), Med Device (its legacy vascular access and drainage products), and corporate activities. The company's core strategic challenge is its position as a small innovator competing against industry giants like Boston Scientific and Medtronic, as well as focused, high-growth disruptors like Inari Medical. These competitors possess far greater resources for research and development, sales and marketing, and clinical trials, making it difficult for AngioDynamics to gain significant market share with its new technologies.
The company's financial performance underscores these competitive pressures. For years, AngioDynamics has failed to achieve consistent profitability, reporting recurring net losses and negative cash flow from operations. This has forced the company to take on significant debt, creating a fragile balance sheet that limits its flexibility to invest in growth. The high debt-to-equity ratio, which is substantially above the industry average, signifies a higher risk profile for investors, as the company must service its debt obligations regardless of its operational performance.
Management has initiated several restructuring and cost-saving initiatives to stabilize the business and focus on its most promising products, namely Auryon and NanoKnife. The success of this turnaround is the central thesis for any potential investment. However, the execution risk is substantial. These products face entrenched competition and long physician adoption cycles. For example, the atherectomy market is crowded, and NanoKnife, despite its technological promise for ablating soft tissue, requires extensive clinical data and marketing to become a standard of care. Without a dramatic improvement in revenue growth and a clear path to profitability, the company remains in a precarious competitive position.
Inari Medical represents a focused, high-growth competitor that has fundamentally disrupted the venous thromboembolism (VTE) market, directly challenging AngioDynamics' AngioVac system. While AngioDynamics is a diversified company with multiple product lines, Inari is a pure-play specialist in VTE treatment. This focus has allowed Inari to achieve market dominance, superior financial performance, and greater investor confidence. In a direct comparison, AngioDynamics appears significantly disadvantaged due to its financial struggles and inability to compete effectively in this lucrative, high-growth niche.
Inari's moat is built on specialization and clinical evidence. Its brand is synonymous with VTE treatment among interventionalists, boasting a >50% market share in its segment, a stark contrast to ANGO's fragmented brand recognition. Switching costs are high in this field due to physician training, and Inari's extensive training programs and compelling clinical data (as shown in studies like FLASH and PEERLESS) create a very sticky ecosystem. While both face high regulatory barriers from the FDA, Inari's track record of securing new device approvals and indication expansions is far stronger than ANGO's recent record. Overall, Inari's focused scale and clinical leadership create a much deeper and more defensible moat. Winner: Inari Medical for its dominant niche brand and strong clinical data-driven moat.
Financially, the two companies are worlds apart. Inari exhibits explosive revenue growth, often posting 25%+ year-over-year increases, whereas ANGO's revenue is stagnant or declining. Inari's gross margins are exceptional at ~88-90%, which is what you'd expect from a market-leading device maker; this is vastly superior to ANGO's ~50% gross margins. Most critically, Inari has a pristine balance sheet with over $350 million in cash and zero debt, providing immense flexibility. ANGO, conversely, operates with significant net debt, and its negative EBITDA makes its leverage ratios meaningless and alarming. Inari is cash-flow positive, while ANGO consistently burns cash. Winner: Inari Medical is the clear winner due to its superior growth, profitability, and fortress balance sheet.
Reviewing their past performance, Inari has delivered exceptional results since its IPO. Its 3-year revenue Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) has been over 40%, dwarfing ANGO's low-single-digit growth during the same period. Inari's stock, despite market volatility, has generated substantial returns for early investors, while ANGO's stock has experienced a catastrophic decline, losing over 90% of its value over the last five years. From a risk perspective, ANGO's persistent losses and debt load make it a far riskier investment, as reflected in its stock's high volatility and severe maximum drawdown. Winner: Inari Medical is the unambiguous winner across all past performance metrics.
Looking forward, Inari's growth prospects are robust, driven by the continued penetration of the large, underserved VTE market and international expansion. The company has a clear pipeline of product enhancements and is expanding its indications, providing a credible path to sustained 20%+ annual growth. AngioDynamics' future growth hinges on a difficult turnaround of multiple product lines, each facing intense competition. ANGO's ability to fund its growth initiatives is constrained by its weak financial position, while Inari's cash-rich balance sheet allows it to invest aggressively in R&D and market development. Winner: Inari Medical has a much clearer, better-funded, and lower-risk growth outlook.
From a valuation perspective, Inari trades at a premium, with a Price-to-Sales (P/S) ratio often in the 4x-6x range, reflecting its high growth and profitability. ANGO trades at a deeply discounted P/S ratio of <0.5x, which is typical for a distressed company. While ANGO may seem 'cheap', this is a classic value trap; the low valuation reflects its unprofitability and high risk. Inari's valuation is justified by its superior quality, strong financial health, and clear growth runway. An investor in Inari is paying for predictable growth, while an investor in ANGO is betting on a speculative turnaround. Winner: Inari Medical is the better value on a risk-adjusted basis.
Winner: Inari Medical over AngioDynamics. Inari is a specialized, high-growth leader that has executed flawlessly in the VTE market, a key growth area where ANGO has failed to compete effectively. Inari's key strengths are its dominant market position, stellar revenue growth (>25%), industry-leading gross margins (~90%), and a debt-free balance sheet with a substantial cash reserve. AngioDynamics' most notable weaknesses are its persistent unprofitability, significant debt burden, and stagnant revenue. The primary risk for an ANGO investor is continued cash burn leading to further dilution or insolvency, making Inari the far superior company and investment.
Merit Medical Systems is a direct and highly relevant competitor to AngioDynamics, offering a similarly broad portfolio of disposable medical devices used in interventional and diagnostic procedures. However, Merit is a larger, more financially stable, and better-managed company. While AngioDynamics struggles with profitability and growth, Merit has established a track record of consistent revenue expansion and positive earnings. This comparison highlights the difference between a stable, mid-sized operator and a struggling smaller player.
Both companies build their economic moats on established relationships with hospitals and physicians, creating moderate switching costs. Merit's brand, however, is stronger due to its larger scale and longer history of profitability, with annual revenues over $1.2 billion compared to ANGO's ~$300 million. This scale gives Merit advantages in purchasing, manufacturing, and distribution. Both face high regulatory barriers from the FDA, but Merit's larger R&D budget (over $80 million annually) allows it to refresh its product portfolio more effectively. ANGO lacks any significant network effects or unique patents that provide a durable edge over Merit. Winner: Merit Medical Systems due to its superior scale and stronger brand reputation.
Analyzing their financial statements, Merit is demonstrably healthier. Merit has a consistent record of revenue growth in the mid-to-high single digits, whereas ANGO's growth is flat and unreliable. Merit consistently generates positive operating income and net income, with operating margins in the 10-12% range, while ANGO posts operating losses. Merit's balance sheet is also stronger; while it carries debt, its net debt-to-EBITDA ratio is a manageable ~2.0x, well within industry norms. ANGO's negative EBITDA makes its leverage ratio a critical concern. Merit generates reliable free cash flow, allowing it to reinvest in the business and manage its debt, a capability ANGO currently lacks. Winner: Merit Medical Systems for its consistent profitability, manageable leverage, and positive cash generation.
Past performance further separates the two. Over the last five years, Merit has grown its revenue by over 25% cumulatively and has expanded its operating margins. In contrast, ANGO's revenue has been largely stagnant, and its margins have compressed due to operational challenges. This is reflected in their stock performance; Merit's stock has provided a positive total shareholder return over the past five years, while ANGO's has declined by over 90%. Merit has proven to be a much lower-risk investment with a track record of steady, albeit not spectacular, execution. Winner: Merit Medical Systems for its stable growth and positive shareholder returns.
Looking ahead, Merit's future growth is driven by geographic expansion, new product launches, and synergistic acquisitions. The company provides guidance for steady 4-6% annual revenue growth, which is credible given its history. AngioDynamics' future is far less certain, relying entirely on the success of a high-risk turnaround centered on a few key products. Merit has the financial resources to pursue its growth strategy, whereas ANGO is financially constrained. Merit's growth path is evolutionary, while ANGO's requires a revolution. Winner: Merit Medical Systems for its more predictable and well-funded growth outlook.
In terms of valuation, Merit trades at a reasonable valuation for a stable medical device company, typically with a forward P/E ratio in the 20-25x range and an EV/EBITDA multiple of ~15x. ANGO's lack of earnings makes P/E unusable, and its EV/Sales multiple of <0.5x reflects significant distress. Merit's valuation represents a fair price for a quality, profitable business with moderate growth prospects. ANGO's valuation reflects a binary bet on survival and a successful turnaround. The risk-adjusted value proposition is far better with Merit. Winner: Merit Medical Systems is better value, as its price is backed by tangible earnings and cash flow.
Winner: Merit Medical Systems over AngioDynamics. Merit is a well-run, profitable, and stable operator in the medical device space, representing everything AngioDynamics is currently struggling to become. Merit's key strengths are its consistent revenue growth (~5%), solid operating margins (~11%), and a manageable debt profile. AngioDynamics' critical weaknesses include its lack of profitability, high leverage, and a challenged growth strategy. While Merit is not a high-growth star, it is a reliable performer, making it a fundamentally superior and safer investment compared to the highly speculative and distressed situation at AngioDynamics.
Comparing AngioDynamics to Boston Scientific (BSX) is a study in contrasts between a micro-cap struggling for survival and a global, large-cap leader in the medical device industry. Boston Scientific is a dominant force in many of ANGO's markets, including peripheral vascular interventions and oncology. Its immense scale, powerful brand, and robust financial profile give it an overwhelming competitive advantage, making it nearly impossible for a small player like AngioDynamics to compete effectively on a broad scale.
Boston Scientific's economic moat is vast and deep. Its brand is a global benchmark for quality and innovation among clinicians, built over decades. Its scale is enormous, with annual revenues exceeding $14 billion, creating massive economies of scale in R&D (over $1.5 billion annually), manufacturing, and distribution that ANGO cannot hope to match. Switching costs for BSX's core products, such as drug-eluting stents and complex catheters, are very high due to physician training and the integration of its devices into hospital workflows. BSX's moat is further fortified by a vast patent portfolio and a global sales force that provides a significant barrier to entry. ANGO's moat is comparatively nonexistent. Winner: Boston Scientific possesses one of the strongest moats in the entire medical technology sector.
From a financial perspective, Boston Scientific is a powerhouse. It consistently delivers high-single-digit to low-double-digit revenue growth, driven by a portfolio of market-leading products. Its operating margins are healthy, typically in the 15-20% range, and it generates billions in free cash flow annually (over $2 billion). Its balance sheet is well-managed, with a net debt-to-EBITDA ratio of ~2.5x, which is easily serviceable by its massive cash flows. AngioDynamics, with its negative margins, cash burn, and precarious debt situation, is in a completely different, and inferior, financial league. Winner: Boston Scientific is the unequivocal winner, with a financial profile that is orders of magnitude stronger.
Boston Scientific's past performance has been excellent. The company has successfully executed a multi-year growth strategy, focusing on high-growth areas like structural heart, endoscopy, and peripheral interventions. This has resulted in a 5-year revenue CAGR of ~8% and significant margin expansion. This operational success has translated into outstanding shareholder returns, with BSX stock appreciating over 100% in the last five years. AngioDynamics' performance over the same period has been disastrous, marked by strategic missteps, financial losses, and a near-total collapse of its stock value. Winner: Boston Scientific wins by a landslide on all historical performance metrics.
Looking to the future, Boston Scientific has numerous growth drivers, including a rich pipeline of innovative products (like the Farapulse PFA System), tuck-in acquisitions, and expansion into emerging markets. Wall Street analysts project continued ~10% annual revenue growth for the foreseeable future, a rate that is exceptional for a company of its size. ANGO's future is a speculative bet on a turnaround. BSX's growth is a well-oiled machine with multiple levers to pull, backed by a massive budget for R&D and M&A. ANGO is simply trying to keep the lights on. Winner: Boston Scientific has a vastly superior and more certain growth outlook.
Valuation reflects these realities. Boston Scientific trades at a premium valuation, with a forward P/E ratio typically over 25x and an EV/Sales multiple of ~6x. This premium is justified by its market leadership, consistent growth, and high profitability. ANGO's distressed valuation (<0.5x EV/Sales) signals the market's deep pessimism about its future. Investing in BSX is buying a best-in-class asset at a premium price. Investing in ANGO is catching a falling knife and hoping it lands safely. The quality differential more than justifies the valuation gap. Winner: Boston Scientific, as its premium valuation is earned through superior performance and a lower risk profile.
Winner: Boston Scientific over AngioDynamics. This is not a fair fight; Boston Scientific is a world-class industry leader, while AngioDynamics is a struggling micro-cap. BSX's strengths are its dominant market positions, massive scale, ~$14 billion in revenue, consistent profitability, and a powerful R&D engine. These strengths directly translate into ANGO's weaknesses, as it is ANGO's lack of scale, profitability, and R&D firepower that puts it at a severe disadvantage. The primary risk of owning ANGO is insolvency, while the primary risk of owning BSX is valuation compression. Boston Scientific is in a different league and is the overwhelmingly superior company.
Penumbra is another innovative, high-growth competitor that operates in some of AngioDynamics' key markets, particularly vascular thrombectomy (the removal of blood clots). Penumbra's success with its Indigo Aspiration System provides a direct and challenging comparison to ANGO's AngioVac system. Much like Inari, Penumbra's focused innovation and strong commercial execution have allowed it to capture significant market share and achieve a financial profile that is far superior to AngioDynamics', highlighting ANGO's struggles to compete against more nimble and specialized rivals.
Penumbra has built a strong economic moat around its proprietary catheter technology and a deep understanding of aspiration mechanics. Its brand is highly respected among neurovascular and peripheral interventionalists, backed by a portfolio of clinical data supporting its products' efficacy. Switching costs are meaningful, as physicians develop expertise with Penumbra's specific systems (the Indigo System with Lightning technology). The company's focused scale in its neuro and vascular niches provides R&D and manufacturing efficiencies. While both companies face FDA regulatory hurdles, Penumbra has a much stronger track record of launching innovative and commercially successful products, such as its RED series of reperfusion catheters. Winner: Penumbra for its superior product innovation and stronger brand in the thrombectomy space.
Financially, Penumbra is in a much stronger position. The company has a history of robust double-digit revenue growth, consistently delivering 15-25% year-over-year increases, while ANGO's revenue has been erratic. Penumbra's gross margins are solid at ~63-65%, significantly better than ANGO's ~50%, and it has achieved sustainable profitability with positive operating margins. Penumbra maintains a healthy balance sheet, often holding a net cash position or very low leverage, in stark contrast to ANGO's debt-laden capital structure. Penumbra generates positive cash from operations, funding its growth internally, while ANGO often relies on external financing or cash reserves to fund its losses. Winner: Penumbra is vastly superior on every key financial metric.
An analysis of past performance shows a clear divergence. Over the last five years, Penumbra has more than doubled its annual revenue, from ~$500 million to over $1 billion. This impressive growth has been accompanied by improving profitability. Its stock has been a strong performer, delivering significant gains for long-term shareholders. During this same period, AngioDynamics has seen its revenue stagnate and its financial condition deteriorate, leading to a near-complete wipeout of its equity value. Penumbra has demonstrated a consistent ability to innovate and execute, while ANGO has struggled. Winner: Penumbra is the decisive winner based on its historical track record of growth and value creation.
Looking ahead, Penumbra's future growth is fueled by its leadership in stroke care, its expanding peripheral vascular business, and its entry into new areas like immersive healthcare technology. The company has a pipeline of new products and a proven commercialization engine. Analysts expect Penumbra to continue growing at a 10-15% rate annually. AngioDynamics' future is a high-stakes bet on a turnaround with limited resources. Penumbra's growth is proactive and well-funded; ANGO's is defensive and uncertain. Winner: Penumbra has a clearer, more innovative, and more credible growth story.
Valuation reflects Penumbra's status as a high-growth med-tech innovator. It typically trades at a high P/S multiple (5x-8x) and a premium P/E ratio (>40x). This valuation is predicated on its continued ability to grow faster than the market. ANGO's sub-0.5x P/S ratio signals market distress and a lack of confidence in its future. While Penumbra's valuation carries the risk of multiple compression if growth slows, it is a price for a proven, high-quality asset. ANGO's cheapness is a reflection of its profound business and financial risks. Winner: Penumbra, as its premium valuation is backed by tangible growth and innovation, making it a better risk-adjusted proposition.
Winner: Penumbra over AngioDynamics. Penumbra is a successful medical device innovator that has out-executed AngioDynamics in the key growth market of vascular thrombectomy. Penumbra's strengths are its rapid and consistent revenue growth (>15%), strong product pipeline, and healthy financial position with low debt. AngioDynamics' weaknesses are its stagnant sales, persistent operating losses, and a balance sheet burdened by debt. The primary risk for ANGO is its inability to compete with focused innovators like Penumbra, leading to further market share erosion and financial distress. Penumbra is a superior company by every measure.
Teleflex offers a different but equally challenging comparison for AngioDynamics. Like ANGO, Teleflex has a broad portfolio of medical devices, but it is much larger, more diversified, and significantly more profitable. Teleflex is a leader in many of ANGO's core legacy markets, such as vascular access (catheters, ports) and interventional products. The comparison shows the difference between a well-managed, scaled portfolio company and a smaller, less profitable one struggling to find its footing.
Teleflex's economic moat is derived from its scale, diversified product portfolio, and entrenched positions in hospitals worldwide. Its brands, such as Arrow in vascular access and LMA in anesthesia, are category leaders with decades of trust, commanding strong market shares in their respective niches. This scale (over $3 billion in annual revenue) provides significant advantages in manufacturing, global distribution, and negotiating with hospital systems. Switching costs for many of its products are moderately high. While ANGO also competes on product-level relationships, it lacks the portfolio-wide scale and brand equity of Teleflex. Winner: Teleflex for its superior scale, brand leadership in core categories, and diversification.
Financially, Teleflex is a model of stability compared to ANGO. It delivers consistent mid-single-digit revenue growth and boasts robust adjusted operating margins in the 20-25% range. This is a world away from ANGO's negative operating margins. Teleflex generates substantial free cash flow (over $400 million annually), which it uses to pay dividends, reinvest in the business, and service its debt. While Teleflex carries a moderate debt load, its net debt-to-EBITDA ratio is a reasonable ~3.0x, easily supported by its strong earnings. ANGO's cash burn and high leverage put it in a financially precarious state. Winner: Teleflex is the clear financial winner due to its strong profitability, cash generation, and stable balance sheet.
Looking at past performance, Teleflex has a long history of steady execution and value creation. Over the past decade, it has successfully integrated acquisitions and driven organic growth, leading to consistent expansion of revenue and earnings. This has resulted in positive, albeit not spectacular, total shareholder returns over most five-year periods. AngioDynamics' history is one of restructuring, strategic pivots, and immense shareholder value destruction. Teleflex's track record inspires confidence in its management's ability to operate effectively, whereas ANGO's does the opposite. Winner: Teleflex for its long track record of stable operations and shareholder value creation.
Teleflex's future growth is expected to come from its innovative UroLift system for BPH, continued strength in its core product lines, and strategic, tuck-in acquisitions. The company has a proven ability to identify, acquire, and integrate new technologies to supplement its organic growth rate of 4-5%. This is a much more reliable and lower-risk growth strategy than ANGO's bet-the-company turnaround on a few products. Teleflex has the financial capacity to execute its strategy, while ANGO does not. Winner: Teleflex has a more balanced, credible, and achievable growth plan.
From a valuation standpoint, Teleflex typically trades at a moderate valuation, with a forward P/E ratio in the 15-20x range and an EV/EBITDA multiple of 12-14x. This reflects its status as a stable, mature, but lower-growth medical device company. ANGO's distressed valuation reflects its high risk and lack of profitability. An investor in Teleflex is paying a fair price for a predictable stream of earnings and cash flows. ANGO offers the potential for high returns if its turnaround succeeds, but with a commensurately high risk of total loss. Winner: Teleflex offers better risk-adjusted value, as its price is underpinned by solid fundamentals.
Winner: Teleflex over AngioDynamics. Teleflex is a larger, more profitable, and better-managed version of what AngioDynamics aims to be: a diversified medical device company. Teleflex's key strengths are its market-leading brands in stable categories, strong and consistent operating margins (~22%), and reliable free cash flow generation. AngioDynamics' defining weaknesses are its inability to generate profits, its burdensome debt load, and its lack of scale. AngioDynamics is a high-risk, speculative turnaround play, while Teleflex is a stable, blue-chip-like investment in the medical device sector. Teleflex is the fundamentally superior company.
Medtronic is one of the world's largest medical technology companies and a behemoth in virtually every market it enters. Comparing AngioDynamics to Medtronic is an exercise in illustrating the vast gap between a small, struggling firm and a global industry titan. Medtronic competes with ANGO in areas like peripheral vascular disease and, more broadly, sets the standard for clinical research, marketing, and sales in the surgical and interventional device space. This comparison underscores the immense competitive hurdles that ANGO faces.
Medtronic's economic moat is arguably one of the widest in the entire healthcare sector. Its brand is a global powerhouse, trusted by clinicians and hospital administrators alike. Its scale is colossal, with annual revenues approaching $32 billion and an R&D budget of over $2.7 billion. This allows Medtronic to outspend all smaller competitors combined on innovation and clinical trials. Switching costs for its implantable devices (pacemakers, defibrillators, spinal implants) are extremely high, creating a locked-in customer base. Its global distribution network and sales force represent an insurmountable barrier for companies like ANGO. Winner: Medtronic has a fortress-like moat built on unparalleled scale, brand, and R&D leadership.
Financially, Medtronic is a juggernaut. It generates consistent mid-single-digit organic growth, a remarkable feat for its size. The company is highly profitable, with adjusted operating margins typically in the 25-30% range, and it produces massive free cash flow (over $5 billion annually). It uses this cash to fund its enormous R&D budget, make strategic acquisitions, and pay a growing dividend, being a member of the S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats. Its balance sheet is strong, with a net debt-to-EBITDA ratio of ~2.5-3.0x that is easily managed. AngioDynamics' financial profile of losses, cash burn, and high debt is not in the same universe. Winner: Medtronic is in a class of its own financially.
Medtronic's past performance is a testament to its durable business model. For decades, it has been a leader in medical innovation, consistently growing its revenue and earnings. While its growth has matured, it remains a reliable performer. Its long-term total shareholder return has been substantial, rewarding investors with both capital appreciation and a steadily increasing dividend. AngioDynamics' history, in contrast, is marked by volatility and, more recently, a precipitous decline, erasing nearly all shareholder value. Medtronic represents stability and reliability; ANGO represents instability and risk. Winner: Medtronic has a long and storied history of execution and value creation that ANGO cannot match.
Looking ahead, Medtronic's future growth is driven by a deep pipeline of next-generation products across its cardiovascular, medical surgical, neuroscience, and diabetes portfolios. Key growth drivers include its Micra leadless pacemaker, Hugo robotic-assisted surgery system, and continuous glucose monitoring systems. While facing challenges in some areas, its diversification provides multiple avenues for growth. It can afford to have some products underperform while others excel. ANGO's future rests on the success of just two or three products, a far riskier proposition. Winner: Medtronic has a diversified, well-funded, and much more certain growth outlook.
From a valuation perspective, Medtronic is a mature blue-chip stock and is valued as such. It typically trades at a forward P/E ratio of 15-18x and offers a dividend yield in the 3-4% range. This valuation is considered reasonable, if not cheap, for a high-quality, defensive company with a strong moat. ANGO's valuation is that of a speculative penny stock, reflecting deep operational and financial distress. There is no comparison in terms of quality. An investor gets a world-class, dividend-paying leader for a fair price with Medtronic, versus a high-risk lottery ticket with ANGO. Winner: Medtronic offers superior risk-adjusted value and income.
Winner: Medtronic over AngioDynamics. Medtronic is a global industry leader whose immense scale, profitability, and innovation capabilities place it in a completely different category from AngioDynamics. Medtronic's key strengths are its ~$32 billion revenue base, dominant market shares, consistent 25%+ operating margins, and status as a Dividend Aristocrat. These strengths create the impossibly difficult competitive environment that is AngioDynamics' primary weakness. The risk for ANGO is being rendered irrelevant by giants like Medtronic, while the risk for Medtronic is slower-than-expected growth. Medtronic is the epitome of a blue-chip medical device company, making it incomparably superior to AngioDynamics.
Based on industry classification and performance score:
AngioDynamics operates a classic medical device business model, selling specialized capital equipment to drive recurring revenue from high-margin, single-use disposables. The company's competitive advantage, or moat, is highly uneven across its product lines. Its NanoKnife ablation system for oncology shows the most promise for a durable moat, thanks to its unique non-thermal technology and growing clinical support. However, its other key growth drivers, the Auryon laser for peripheral artery disease and the AlphaVac system for blood clots, face intense competition from larger, more established players in crowded markets. The investor takeaway is mixed, as the company's potential is tempered by significant execution risk and the challenge of competing against industry giants.
The company is successfully growing the installed base for its Auryon and NanoKnife systems, which is crucial for its recurring revenue model, but this base remains small compared to larger competitors, limiting its market leverage.
AngioDynamics' strategy relies on placing Auryon laser consoles and NanoKnife generators to drive sales of high-margin disposables. The company has reported consistent growth in its installed base, a positive indicator of market adoption. However, the absolute number of systems is significantly smaller than the fleets deployed by industry giants like Medtronic or Boston Scientific in their respective domains. A smaller installed base limits the network effect among physicians and reduces the company's negotiating power with hospital systems. While the company reports growth in disposable revenue, suggesting good system utilization, it does not disclose specific metrics like procedures per system, making a direct comparison to peers difficult. In the surgical device sub-industry, a large and active installed base acts as a powerful competitive moat, and AngioDynamics' base is not yet at a scale to be considered a strong advantage.
The company's business is heavily reliant on high-margin disposables, which is a strength, but its overall gross margins suggest it lacks the significant pricing power of top-tier competitors.
The sale of single-use kits and catheters is the economic engine for AngioDynamics, accounting for over 80% of its revenue, which is typical for this business model. Growth in its Med Tech disposable revenue demonstrates a solid kit attach rate for new system placements. The challenge lies in pricing. While the unique NanoKnife system likely commands a premium price, the Auryon and AlphaVac products operate in highly competitive fields where pricing pressure from hospitals and Group Purchasing Organizations (GPOs) is intense. The company's consolidated gross margin has hovered in the low-to-mid 50% range. This is substantially below the 65% to 75% gross margins often reported by industry leaders like Edwards Lifesciences or Intuitive Surgical, indicating a less favorable product mix and weaker negotiating power.
Physician training on AngioDynamics' specialized devices creates moderate switching costs, but its training and service infrastructure is less extensive than the large-scale ecosystems of its major competitors.
For complex devices like the NanoKnife and Auryon systems, the time and effort a physician invests in training creates a natural reluctance to switch to a different platform. AngioDynamics facilitates this through various physician education programs. However, the company's training network is dwarfed by the global capabilities of competitors like Johnson & Johnson or Medtronic, which operate vast training centers and employ thousands of clinical specialists who become deeply integrated into hospital operations. These large players can offer a level of on-site support, service, and bundled contracting that is difficult for a smaller company to match. While AngioDynamics' products require training that creates some customer stickiness, its overall service and support ecosystem is not robust enough to constitute a strong competitive lock-in.
AngioDynamics' products are designed to function within existing clinical workflows, but they lack the advanced software and IT integration that larger competitors are using to create sticky, data-driven ecosystems.
A modern medical device company's moat is increasingly tied to software and data. AngioDynamics' devices, like the AlphaVac catheter, are standalone tools that integrate into the procedural workflow at a basic level (e.g., compatibility with standard imaging systems). However, they do not offer the kind of sophisticated platform integration seen from industry leaders. Competitors are building ecosystems where surgical robots, imaging modalities, diagnostic tools, and hospital Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) are interconnected. This creates immense value by improving efficiency, tracking outcomes, and managing inventory, which in turn creates powerful switching costs. AngioDynamics does not currently compete at this level of IT and workflow integration, positioning its products as individual tools rather than components of an indispensable, connected platform.
AngioDynamics is actively generating clinical data for its key growth products, but its body of evidence is still developing and is not yet as robust as that of market leaders.
Strong clinical data is the currency of the medical device industry, and AngioDynamics is making necessary investments here. For its NanoKnife system, the ongoing DIRECT study for pancreatic cancer and the PRESERVE study for prostate cancer are critical for expanding its indications and driving adoption in high-value oncology markets. For its Auryon laser, the PATHFINDER registry provides real-world evidence of its effectiveness in treating peripheral artery disease. However, when compared to the sub-industry, ANGO is still playing catch-up. Competitors in the thrombectomy space, like Inari Medical, have extensive data from large-scale registries like FLASH, setting a high bar for AlphaVac's APEX-AV trial to meet. This relative lack of long-term, large-scale, and comparative clinical data remains a significant weakness, making it harder to secure inclusion in treatment guidelines and convince clinicians to switch from established therapies.
AngioDynamics shows some positive signs with recent double-digit revenue growth, but this is overshadowed by significant financial weaknesses. The company is consistently unprofitable, with a recent quarterly net margin of -14.4%, and is burning through cash at an alarming rate, with free cash flow of -$16.65 million in the last quarter. While its balance sheet has very little debt, the rapid decline in its cash reserves is a major concern. The investor takeaway is negative, as the current operational model is unsustainable without significant improvements in profitability and cash management.
Recent revenue growth and healthy gross margins are encouraging, but the company lacks the scale and cost control needed to achieve profitability, resulting in substantial net losses.
AngioDynamics has shown a positive turnaround in its top line, with revenue growth of 12.18% in the most recent quarter, following 12.93% growth in the prior quarter. This reverses the decline seen in the last fiscal year and suggests renewed market demand. Furthermore, its gross margin of 55.28% is solid for the medical device industry, indicating healthy pricing power on its products.
Unfortunately, these strengths do not extend down the income statement. The company's high operating expenses mean it is not profitable at its current scale. The operating margin in the latest quarter was a negative -10.43%, and the net profit margin was -14.4%. This demonstrates that despite selling its products for a good profit, the costs of running the business are far too high, leading to significant losses for shareholders.
While the company's extremely low debt is a significant strength, its rapidly declining cash balance from severe operational cash burn poses a serious liquidity risk.
AngioDynamics maintains a very strong balance sheet from a leverage perspective. Total debt stood at just $9.6 million in the most recent quarter against $178.86 million in shareholder equity, resulting in an exceptionally low debt-to-equity ratio of 0.05. This is a clear positive, minimizing financial risk from interest payments.
However, the company's liquidity situation is alarming. Cash and equivalents plummeted from $55.89 million to $38.76 million in just one quarter. This was driven by a negative operating cash flow of -$15.91 million. Although the current ratio of 2.29 appears healthy, suggesting sufficient short-term assets to cover liabilities, the current rate of cash burn is unsustainable. If losses continue at this pace, the company's cash position could become critical within a few quarters, potentially forcing it to raise capital under unfavorable conditions.
The company is failing to achieve operating leverage, as bloated sales and administrative expenses consume all gross profit and lead to significant operating losses.
AngioDynamics' R&D spending appears disciplined, representing 8.4% of sales ($6.33 million) in the last quarter, a level that is in line with industry peers for investing in innovation. The primary issue lies in its Selling, General & Administrative (SG&A) expenses, which are disproportionately high. In the most recent quarter, SG&A was $40.78 million, or a staggering 54% of revenue. This massive overhead completely erases the company's healthy gross profit of $41.86 million.
As a result, the company has no operating leverage and consistently posts operating losses. The operating margin was -10.43% in the last quarter and -8.23% for the full prior fiscal year. This demonstrates a fundamental problem with the company's cost structure; revenue growth is not translating to profitability. Until management can rein in SG&A costs, a path to sustainable profit remains out of reach.
Despite efficient management of customer receivables, the company suffers from slow-moving inventory and a severe inability to generate cash from its core operations.
The company manages its accounts receivable effectively. With receivables of $42.64 million on quarterly sales of $75.71 million, its Days Sales Outstanding (DSO) is around 51 days, which is strong for the medical device industry and indicates prompt customer payments. However, its inventory management is less efficient. The annual inventory turnover ratio is low at 2.2, implying inventory sits for over 160 days, which ties up cash and increases the risk of obsolescence.
The most critical failure in its working capital management is the severely negative operating cash flow. In the most recent quarter, the company's core business operations burned through -$15.91 million in cash. A company's primary purpose is to generate cash from its operations, and AngioDynamics is failing to do so. This operational cash drain is a major red flag regarding the company's fundamental financial health and efficiency.
The company has moderate capital requirements, but its inability to generate positive free cash flow from its asset base is a critical failure.
AngioDynamics operates with a relatively light capital model, with annual capital expenditures representing about 3.5% of sales in fiscal 2025. Its asset turnover ratio of 1.13 in the most recent quarter indicates that it generates about $1.13 in sales for every dollar of assets, which is reasonably efficient for the medical device industry.
However, this operational efficiency does not translate into financial returns for shareholders. The company is consistently failing to generate positive cash flow. In the last fiscal year, free cash flow was a negative -$20.31 million, and this cash burn accelerated in the most recent quarter to a negative -$16.65 million. This indicates that the company's investments and operations are consuming far more cash than they generate, a highly unsustainable situation that undermines the value of its asset base.
AngioDynamics' past performance has been extremely poor, characterized by persistent unprofitability, erratic revenue, and significant cash burn. Over the last five fiscal years (FY2021-FY2025), the company has consistently reported net losses, with earnings per share reaching as low as -$4.59 in FY2024. Its revenue has stagnated, culminating in a 10.3% decline in FY2024, and free cash flow has been negative in four of the last five years. Compared to peers like Merit Medical and Inari Medical, which demonstrate consistent growth and profitability, AngioDynamics lags significantly. The investor takeaway is negative, as the historical record reveals a struggling company that has destroyed significant shareholder value.
While specific metrics are unavailable, the company's stagnant revenue and competitor commentary strongly suggest that its key systems are failing to gain traction and are losing market share.
Direct historical data on system placements, installed base, or procedure volumes is not provided. However, we can infer performance from other financial results and competitive analysis. The company's flat-to-declining revenue trend is a strong indicator that it is not successfully placing new systems or driving increased use of its disposable products. Growth in the medical device industry, particularly for companies with a capital equipment and disposables model, is heavily reliant on expanding the installed base of systems and increasing the volume of procedures performed with them.
The provided competitor analysis reinforces this negative conclusion. Peers like Inari Medical and Penumbra are noted for successfully dominating the thrombectomy market, directly challenging ANGO's AngioVac system. Their rapid revenue growth is evidence of successful system adoption and procedure growth. AngioDynamics' lack of top-line growth strongly implies a failure to achieve similar success, indicating a weak trajectory in this crucial performance area.
The stock has delivered catastrophic losses to shareholders, with a decline of over 90% in the last five years, reflecting the market's judgment on its deep-seated operational and financial risks.
AngioDynamics has generated disastrous returns for its shareholders. As noted in the competitive analysis, the stock's value has collapsed by more than 90% over the last five years. This is a direct reflection of the company's deteriorating fundamentals, including persistent losses, cash burn, and loss of market share. This performance is a stark contrast to successful peers like Boston Scientific, which delivered over 100% returns in the same period. With no dividend, the Total Shareholder Return (TSR) is entirely dependent on stock price, which has been almost completely wiped out.
The company's risk profile is exceptionally high. Its market capitalization has shrunk from $882 million at the end of FY2021 to $253 million at the end of FY2024, putting it in the volatile micro-cap category. The ongoing net losses and negative cash flow create significant solvency risk. While its beta is listed as a modest 0.78, this metric can be misleading for a stock with such high idiosyncratic risk tied to its potential failure as a business.
Revenue growth has been erratic and recently turned negative, with a `10.3%` decline in FY2024, demonstrating a lack of durable demand and an inability to compete effectively.
AngioDynamics' revenue history does not show sustained or resilient growth. While the company posted growth in FY2021 (10.2%), FY2022 (8.7%), and FY2023 (7.1%), this momentum completely reversed with a significant 10.3% decline in FY2024. Over the full five-year period from FY2021 to FY2025, revenue is essentially flat, moving from $291.0 million to a projected $292.5 million. A five-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) near zero is a very weak result in the medical device industry.
This performance is especially poor when benchmarked against competitors. High-growth peers like Penumbra and Inari have delivered consistent double-digit growth, while even larger, more mature companies like Merit Medical and Boston Scientific have achieved steady mid-single-digit growth. AngioDynamics' inability to grow its top line consistently suggests it is losing market share and struggling to find durable demand for its products.
AngioDynamics suffers from chronically low gross margins and deeply negative operating margins, indicating a lack of pricing power and an unsustainable cost structure compared to its peers.
The company's profitability margins have been consistently poor and show no signs of durable improvement. Gross margins have hovered in a range of 50.9% to 53.9% over the last five years. While stable, this level is significantly below that of specialized, high-growth competitors like Inari Medical, which boasts gross margins around 90%. This suggests AngioDynamics lacks differentiated products that command premium pricing.
The more critical issue is the company's operating margin, which has been negative every year over the analysis period, ranging from -5.1% in FY2021 to a low of -11.1% in FY2024. A negative operating margin means the company loses money from its core business operations before even accounting for interest and taxes. This persistent unprofitability at the operational level is a clear indication of a flawed business model or an inability to control costs relative to the revenue it generates.
The company consistently burns cash, reporting negative free cash flow in four of the last five years, which has prevented any capital returns and forced shareholder dilution.
AngioDynamics has a poor track record of cash generation. Over the last five fiscal years (FY2021-FY2025), free cash flow (FCF) was positive only once ($10.4 million in FY2021). Since then, the company has consistently consumed cash, with FCF figures of -$22.9 million, -$9.1 million, -$35.7 million, and -$20.3 million. This demonstrates that the business's core operations are not generating enough cash to cover its own investments and expenses, a significant red flag for financial stability.
This cash burn makes it impossible to return capital to shareholders. The company pays no dividend and has not conducted any meaningful share buybacks. Instead, the number of shares outstanding has increased every year, ranging from a 1% to 1.78% annual increase, diluting the ownership stake of existing investors. This contrasts sharply with profitable peers like Medtronic or Teleflex that generate substantial free cash flow to fund dividends and reinvestment.
AngioDynamics' future growth outlook is a high-risk, high-reward scenario heavily dependent on a few key products. The company's primary growth catalyst is the NanoKnife system, which could see a surge in adoption if it gains FDA approval for pancreatic cancer, a significant unmet need. However, its other growth drivers, Auryon and AlphaVac, face intense competition from larger, better-funded rivals in crowded markets. While the pipeline holds promise, the company struggles with weaker gross margins and a lack of geographic scale compared to peers. The investor takeaway is mixed; AngioDynamics offers potential for significant upside if its clinical trials succeed, but faces substantial execution risk and competitive threats that could easily derail its growth story.
The company's gross margins are consistently in the low-to-mid 50% range, which is significantly below medtech industry leaders and indicates a lack of pricing power or manufacturing cost advantages.
A key indicator of manufacturing efficiency and pricing power is gross margin. AngioDynamics' consolidated gross margin has struggled to rise above the mid-50s, a figure that is substantially lower than the 65% to 75% margins achieved by top-tier surgical and interventional device companies. This suggests that the company either faces significant manufacturing cost pressures or, more likely, lacks the pricing power to command premium prices for its products in competitive markets like atherectomy and thrombectomy. A lower gross margin limits the amount of cash available to reinvest in critical R&D and commercial activities, placing the company at a fundamental disadvantage against its more profitable competitors. While the company has sufficient production capacity, its cost structure is not a competitive strength.
AngioDynamics' product portfolio completely lacks a software, subscription, or data component, putting it at a strategic disadvantage as the industry shifts towards creating integrated, data-driven ecosystems.
In the modern medical device landscape, leaders are building competitive moats through software, data analytics, and recurring revenue streams that create sticky customer relationships. AngioDynamics currently has no meaningful presence in this area. Its devices are standalone hardware products. The company does not generate software or subscription revenue, and it does not offer data monetization services. This absence is a significant strategic weakness, as competitors use software platforms to integrate into hospital workflows, track patient outcomes, and increase switching costs. Without a software strategy, AngioDynamics' products risk being viewed as interchangeable commodities rather than essential components of an integrated clinical solution.
AngioDynamics' entire future growth story hinges on its promising pipeline, particularly the potential FDA approval for NanoKnife in pancreatic cancer, which represents a major potential catalyst.
The company's pipeline is its most compelling growth asset. The submission of the DIRECT trial data for NanoKnife to the FDA for an indication in pancreatic cancer is a transformative potential event. If approved, it would open up a significant new market and could establish NanoKnife as a standard of care. Additionally, ongoing clinical trials for AlphaVac (APEX-AV) and data collection for Auryon (PATHFINDER) are crucial for driving adoption and expanding market access. The company's R&D spending as a percentage of sales is robust, typically in the 13-15% range, reflecting its commitment to innovation. While clinical trials carry inherent risk, the potential upside from these programs is the primary reason to be optimistic about the company's long-term growth.
AngioDynamics has a limited international footprint, with the vast majority of its growth efforts focused on the highly competitive U.S. market, creating concentration risk and limiting its overall growth potential.
Geographic diversification is a key growth lever for medical device companies, but it is a weakness for AngioDynamics. International sales represent only about 20% of the company's total revenue, and this segment has not demonstrated consistent, high growth. The company's primary focus remains on penetrating U.S. hospital accounts, where it faces its largest and most entrenched competitors. While adding new domestic accounts is essential, the lack of a robust international growth strategy means AngioDynamics is missing out on faster-growing emerging markets and is more exposed to reimbursement and policy changes within the U.S. healthcare system. Compared to peers who generate 40-50% or more of their sales internationally, AngioDynamics' geographic strategy appears underdeveloped.
The company does not report a formal backlog, and its Med Tech revenue growth, while positive, is not strong enough to suggest that demand is significantly outpacing its ability to supply the market.
AngioDynamics operates primarily on a disposable-driven model where demand is reflected in recurring product sales rather than a long-term order backlog. The key indicator of demand intake is revenue growth in its key platforms. While the Med Tech segment revenue has been growing, the pace has been inconsistent and faces immense competitive pressure, particularly for the Auryon and AlphaVac products. For fiscal year 2023, total revenue grew by a modest 3.1%. This level of growth does not indicate overwhelming market demand or an order book that provides strong future revenue visibility. Without a clear signal that demand is accelerating significantly ahead of shipments, the company's growth outlook remains uncertain and heavily dependent on near-term commercial execution.
As of November 3, 2025, with a closing price of $12.14, AngioDynamics, Inc. (ANGO) appears significantly overvalued based on its current fundamentals. The company is unprofitable, with a negative EPS of -$0.78 (TTM) and negative free cash flow, making traditional earnings-based valuations impossible. Key metrics like the Price-to-Sales ratio of 1.64 and a Price-to-Tangible-Book value of approximately 4.55 seem stretched for a company not generating profit or cash. The stock is trading in the upper end of its 52-week range ($6.57–$13.50), suggesting the market is pricing in a strong future recovery that has yet to materialize in bottom-line results. The overall takeaway is negative for value-oriented investors, as the current price is not supported by the company's financial performance.
Despite recent revenue growth, the company's sales multiple appears stretched given its negative profit margins and ongoing cash burn.
For companies with negative earnings, the EV/Sales ratio can be a useful valuation tool. AngioDynamics has a TTM EV/Sales ratio of 1.55. While the company has shown positive recent revenue growth of 12.2% year-over-year, this is paired with a negative operating margin of -7.73% and a gross margin of 54.15%. A comparison shows ANGO's P/S ratio of 1.7x is below the medical equipment industry average of 2.8x, which seems positive at first glance. However, without a clear and imminent path to profitability, paying 1.55 times revenue for a business that is losing money on both an operating and net basis is a speculative bet on a successful turnaround. The valuation is not justified by the quality of the revenue at present.
The company's negative EBITDA and free cash flow make these core valuation metrics unusable and signal a current inability to generate cash profits from operations.
AngioDynamics is not currently profitable on a cash earnings basis. Its EBITDA for the trailing twelve months (TTM) was negative, making the EV/EBITDA ratio meaningless. Similarly, the company's free cash flow was -$17.61 million over the last twelve months, resulting in a negative free cash flow yield. This indicates the company is consuming cash to run its business, rather than generating surplus cash for shareholders. For investors who prioritize companies that produce strong, reliable cash flows, ANGO does not meet the criteria at this time.
The PEG ratio cannot be calculated due to negative earnings, preventing any assessment of whether the stock price is reasonable relative to its future growth prospects.
The PEG ratio is a tool used to determine a stock's value while taking into account future earnings growth. It is calculated by dividing the P/E ratio by the expected earnings growth rate. Since AngioDynamics has negative trailing twelve-month earnings per share (-$0.78), its P/E ratio is not meaningful, and therefore the PEG ratio is not applicable. Without positive earnings, investors cannot use this standard metric to gauge if they are paying a fair price for anticipated growth.
The company provides no return to shareholders through dividends or buybacks and is increasing its share count, while its net cash position offers only a minor buffer.
Shareholder yield reflects the direct returns a company provides to its investors. AngioDynamics pays no dividend, so its dividend yield is 0%. Furthermore, the company is not repurchasing shares; in fact, its shares outstanding have increased by 1.49% over the past year, which dilutes existing shareholders. The company does have a net cash position of $29.16 million ($0.71 per share), which provides some financial flexibility. However, this net cash represents only about 5.9% of the company's market capitalization, which is a small cushion for a business that is currently burning through cash. Overall, there is no shareholder yield to support the stock's valuation.
With no positive earnings, the company has no P/E ratio, making it impossible to value on this fundamental basis or compare it to profitable industry peers.
The Price-to-Earnings (P/E) ratio is one of the most common valuation metrics, but it is useless for AngioDynamics at present. The company's earnings per share (EPS) over the last twelve months were -$0.78, and its net income was -$32.10 million. Consequently, both the trailing and forward P/E ratios are not meaningful. This complete lack of earnings makes it impossible to compare ANGO's valuation to the broader Medical Instruments & Supplies industry, which has a weighted average P/E ratio of 67.06, on a like-for-like basis. A stock with no "E" in the P/E ratio carries a higher risk profile.
The primary risk for AngioDynamics stems from its position as a smaller player in a highly competitive industry dominated by giants like Medtronic and Boston Scientific. These competitors possess far greater financial resources for research, development, and marketing, allowing them to innovate faster and exert significant pricing pressure. Furthermore, the medical device industry is subject to stringent and lengthy regulatory approval processes from bodies like the FDA. Any delays in product approvals or negative clinical trial results for its key growth drivers could severely impact future revenue streams and investor confidence. Macroeconomic pressures, such as hospital budget constraints during economic downturns, could also slow the adoption of new technologies, while persistent high interest rates increase the servicing cost of the company's existing debt.
From a financial standpoint, AngioDynamics is on unstable ground. The company has a long history of generating net losses and struggling to produce consistent positive free cash flow. This persistent unprofitability raises serious questions about the long-term sustainability of its business model. Compounding this issue is a vulnerable balance sheet burdened with a significant amount of debt relative to its market size. This debt not only consumes cash through interest payments but also restricts the company's financial flexibility, making it more difficult and expensive to fund future operations, potential acquisitions, or critical R&D projects needed to stay competitive.
Much of the company's investment thesis hinges on execution risk tied to its newer product platforms, especially AlphaVac and Auryon. While these products target large and growing markets, their success is not guaranteed. The company must effectively scale its sales and marketing efforts to wrestle market share away from well-entrenched competitors, a costly and challenging endeavor. Any stumbles in manufacturing, supply chain logistics, or achieving favorable reimbursement from insurers could derail growth projections. This high degree of concentration on a few key products means that a failure or underperformance in any one of them could have an outsized negative impact on the company's overall prospects.
Click a section to jump