Boston Scientific seems to have a lot priced in: shares are flat over five years while the business has doubled. Revenue roughly doubled, mainly from Farapulse and Watchman rather than M&A; operating income rose from $1.8B to $4.1B, EPS grew 3.5x to $2.40, margins expanded and free cash flow more than doubled with flat share count. Growth is slowing from high levels amid new competition and possible GLP-1 effects on case volumes, but medtech offers a margin of safety until the market rotates. … Show more

Boston Scientific looks cheap on an estimate-based cash-earnings screen: 13x current and 12x next year's cash earnings versus 14x for medical-device makers imply a $43.85-$55.81 fair range against $42.04. This is a levels-only comparison using reported estimates, not fundamental diligence. x.com 

Boston Scientific's key franchises look vulnerable to competition in 2027, with a big acquisition at a bad multiple seeming the solution. Insider buying is the only positive; it makes a random bounce to $60 very likely, but the stock is still unconvincing. The possible bull case is that management knows the acquisition will go very well and is buying the dip. x.com 

Boston Scientific is not expensive at about 11x EBITDA for a non-cyclical business growing 5%+ organically. Its guidance looks conservative but not the kitchen-sink reset investors wanted, so the stock is probably dead money for now rather than headed lower. x.com  x.com  x.com  x.com 

Boston Scientific's extreme pessimism is already priced in after weaker-than-expected results destroyed the stock, leaving it at 11x 2027 earnings and creating a potential opportunity. The company makes medical devices, mainly for cardiology. x.com 

Boston Scientific warrants caution because its debt levels leave it behind much cleaner, higher-quality medical-device stories. x.com 

Boston Scientific's H2 2027 heart-device launches could revive growth in 2028, lifting earnings and its valuation multiple. Slowing heart-treatment growth led to a guidance cut, though Q2 organic sales grew 7% and adjusted EPS about 15%. August's cyberattack later disrupted operations, which have recovered. The potential opportunity requires patience: management expects minimal EPS growth in 2027, and competition could keep growth subdued after the launches. x.com 

Boston Scientific looks mispriced after a broad medtech selloff: it has some issues, but at about 17x forward earnings versus Medtronic's 14.5x, the valuation spread between them is too narrow. Elsewhere in medtech, Intuitive Surgical trades at its lowest multiple in years, Abbott has real problems in diagnostics and slowing diabetes, and Stryker, the only one without a big blowup, may be due for one. x.com 

Boston Scientific and Abbott are cheaper than their history but unlikely to compound at 20% over the next five years. The medical-device selloff looks like a clear overreaction, but Intuitive Surgical is worth paying up for even after a 30% drawdown, and TransMedics and PROCEPT BioRobotics have a real shot at about 30% annual returns over five years on 20%-plus revenue growth, operating leverage and possible multiple expansion. Favoring growth over cheaper names means more risk but more upside. … Show more

Demographics should offset the risks to procedure growth at surgery-related device makers such as Boston Scientific, CONMED, Edwards Lifesciences and AtriCure for the next five years, though those risks eventually bite. @Borlaug_ argues that falling obesity rates could cut a couple hundred basis points from long-term growth in many procedure categories, with policy the near-term negative. Intuitive Surgical flagged the ACA-sensitive areas well. Within devices, S-curve stories are preferable. … Show more