For AI assistants & researchers — machine-readable summary of this page
What this page is: Delvantic's full research page for Intuitive Surgical, Inc. (ISRG) — AI-driven forensic equity research: mechanical valuation models (DCF, EPV, anchored-PE, scenario) plus three independent AI lenses (Quality / Value / Sentiment). Everything below is rendered server-side; you are not missing content that requires JavaScript. All scores are predictions and research opinions, not financial advice.
Our current read (analysis of 2026-08-23): Designation Watch · Gem Score +3 (−100…+100 Quality+Value blend) · Quality 84 · Value -63 · Sentiment 54 (timing only, not weighted) · Composite fair value $160.41 vs $353.33 at analysis
Page map (sections in order; each card carries a stable
reference-name attribute you can cite):
profile-header/price-overview— company profile, live quote, market capextended-analysis— the core: three AI lens reads with findings, scores, and the analyst memofuture-predictions— our forward price-band predictionsmarket-narrative/ai-findings/gpt-critique— narrative context, cross-model findings, and an adversarial critique of our own analysis (near the end of the document)- Members-only sections (render as login gates for anonymous readers):
price-history,income-trend,key-metrics,financials(statement tables),insider-trading. The analysis above is public; the raw data tables require a free account.
More for machine readers: site briefing at
/llms.txt ·
any ticker resolves at delvantic.com/stock/TICKER ·
raw inputs are public-company filings and market data (via licensed data feeds);
every model, score, lens read, and prediction on this page is Delvantic's own analysis.
Intuitive Surgical, Inc.
ISRG NASDAQIntuitive Surgical, Inc. is a medical technology company that develops, manufactures, and markets robotic-assisted systems designed to support minimally invasive care in hospitals and healthcare facilities worldwide. Its primary platforms include the da Vinci Surgical System, which enables surgeons to perform complex procedures through small incisions with enhanced precision, visualization, and control, and the Ion endoluminal system, which focuses on minimally invasive lung biopsies and diagnostic procedures. Intuitive Surgical provides a comprehensive ecosystem around these systems, including surgical instruments, disposable accessories, vision and imaging technologies, training, and technical support services. The company works closely with surgeons and healthcare providers across specialties such as urology, gynecology, general surgery, and thoracic care, aiming to broaden access to minimally invasive treatment options. Intuitive Surgical, Inc. was incorporated in 1995 and is headquartered in Sunnyvale, California.
Price Overview
Price History (1 Year)
Revenue & Net Income Trend
| Period | Revenue | Net Income | Net Margin | YoY/QoQ |
|---|
Key Metrics
EPS (Diluted): 7.87
Total Equity: $17.94B
Shares: 362,700,000
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $3.37B
EBITDA: $3.55B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $3.37B
Revenue: $10.06B
Revenue: $10.06B
Revenue: $10.06B
Total Equity: $17.94B
Tax Rate: 13.1%
Equity: $17.94B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $3.37B
Current Liabilities: $2.01B
Long-Term Debt: $0.00
Total Debt: $0.00
Total Equity: $17.94B
Shares: 362,700,000
Shares: 362,700,000
CapEx: -$539.80M
Shares: 362,700,000
Stock Price: $353.33
Net Income: $2.86B
Industry Benchmarks
Income Statement (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 2, 2026 3:09pm (21d ago)| Metric | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $5.7B | $6.2B | $7.1B | $8.4B | $10.1B |
| Cost of Revenue | $1.8B | $2.0B | $2.4B | $2.7B | $3.4B |
| Gross Profit | $4.0B | $4.2B | $4.7B | $5.6B | $6.6B |
| Operating Expenses | $2.1B | $2.6B | $3.0B | $3.3B | $3.7B |
| Operating Income | $1.8B | $1.6B | $1.8B | $2.3B | $2.9B |
| Net Income | $1.7B | $1.3B | $1.8B | $2.3B | $2.9B |
| EBITDA | $2.1B | $1.9B | $2.1B | $2.8B | $3.5B |
| EPS | $4.79 | $3.72 | $5.12 | $6.54 | $8.00 |
| EPS (Diluted) | $4.66 | $3.65 | $5.03 | $6.42 | $7.87 |
Balance Sheet (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 2, 2026 2:49pm (21d ago)| Metric | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cash & Equivalents | $1.3B | $1.6B | $2.8B | $2.0B | $3.4B |
| Total Current Assets | $5.8B | $6.3B | $7.9B | $7.1B | $9.8B |
| Total Assets | $13.6B | $13.0B | $15.4B | $18.7B | $20.5B |
| Current Liabilities | $1.1B | $1.4B | $1.7B | $1.7B | $2.0B |
| Long-Term Debt | — | — | — | — | — |
| Total Liabilities | $1.6B | $1.9B | $2.0B | $2.2B | $2.5B |
| Total Equity | $12.0B | $11.1B | $13.4B | $16.5B | $17.9B |
| Retained Earnings | $4.8B | $3.5B | $4.7B | $6.8B | $7.0B |
Cash Flow (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 2, 2026 3:09pm (21d ago)| Metric | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash Flow | $2.1B | $1.5B | $1.8B | $2.4B | $3.0B |
| Capital Expenditure | -$353.5M | -$532.4M | -$1.1B | -$1.1B | -$539.8M |
| Free Cash Flow | $1.7B | $958.4M | $749.6M | $1.3B | $2.5B |
| Acquisitions (net) | -$8.7M | -$12.8M | -$8.9M | -$1.0M | -$13.9M |
| Net Debt Issued / (Repaid) | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dividends Paid | — | — | — | — | — |
| Stock Buybacks | $0 | -$2.6B | -$416.3M | $0 | -$2.3B |
| Net Change in Cash | -$332.5M | $294.7M | $1.2B | -$707.7M | $1.3B |
Growth Trends (YoY %)
Last updated: Aug 2, 2026 3:09pm (21d ago)| Metric | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | +9.0% | +14.5% | +17.2% | +20.5% |
| Gross Profit Growth | +6.0% | +12.7% | +19.1% | +17.9% |
| Operating Income Growth | -13.4% | +12.0% | +32.9% | +25.4% |
| Net Income Growth | -22.4% | +36.0% | +29.2% | +23.0% |
| EBITDA Growth | -9.4% | +12.9% | +29.7% | +27.2% |
Deep Analysis
Risk : Reward — if the last quarter repeats
Live · as of 2026-08-19 09:00Even the bull case prices 55% below today — the ratio here measures the model-vs-market gap, not payoff odds. Another quarter like the worst recent one costs 71%.
| Case | Growth | Margin | Fair value | vs price ($353.33) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bull — recovery | +30% | 32.7% | $158.07 | -55% |
| Base — stabilizes | +20% | 28.5% | $105.79 | -70% |
| Bear — keeps slipping | +10% | 24.2% | $68.95 | -80% |
| Stress — last quarter repeats | +19% | 28.2% | $101.42 | -71% |
Narrative Economics
market-narrative step).
Claude Reading
Looking at the raw trajectory first: quarterly revenue moved from $2.04B (Q3'24) to $2.89B (Q2'26), a clean ~42% two-year climb with no wobble. TTM revenue is roughly $11.04B, TTM net income ~$3.14B. Margins are remarkably stable in the 27-31% net band. Full-year 2025 posted 20.5% revenue growth and 23% earnings growth — this is not decelerating in any meaningful sense; the "decelerating" tag looks like noise from the Q1'26 sequential dip that is almost certainly seasonal (Q1'25 was also a sequential drop from Q4'24). FCF CAGR of 82% is a base-effect artifact — 2021 FCF was depressed; normalized FCF growth is more like 20-25%. Balance sheet is fortress: $3.37B cash, zero debt, 4.87x current ratio, $17.94B equity. ROIC 17.6% on a debt-free capital structure is genuinely excellent.
Now the models. The synthesis pegs fair value at $150-170 vs $353 — implying ISRG is worth less than half of market. I think this is directionally right but the magnitude is aggressive to the point of being unhelpful. A DCF that spits out $150 for a company compounding earnings at 23%, generating 29% operating margins, with a 20-year installed-base moat and zero debt, is almost certainly using a terminal growth rate and discount rate calibrated for an average med-device business, not a category monopolist. The Thesis Evaluation is more honest: it correctly flags that current price embeds ~60% FCF growth expectations, which requires 2x acceleration from the recent ~20% trajectory. That's the real bear case — not that ISRG is worth $150, but that at $353 (44.9x P/E, 12.7x sales, 34.8x EV/EBITDA) you're paying platform-monopoly multiples for a business growing 20%, not 40%. On PEG-adjusted terms that's ~2.2x, rich but not absurd for this quality.
The contrarian pushback the models underweight: Medtronic's Hugo and J&J's Ottava have been "coming" for years and ISRG keeps posting 20%+ growth quarters. The installed base of 9,000+ trained surgeons and the reimbursement/procedural incumbency is not a soft moat — surgical retraining costs and hospital procurement inertia are brutal switching costs. Meanwhile, insider activity is genuinely benign — the "sales" are 23-400 share tax-withholding-adjacent transactions, not meaningful distribution. That's not a red flag. Also worth noting: net margin actually expanded from 27.8% (2024) to 28.4% (2025) — margin compression from competition has not started to show up in the numbers yet. The bear thesis is entirely forward-looking narrative.
Where I land: I partially agree with the "overvalued" verdict but dissent on the severity. Fair value at 20% growth, 28% net margin, sustainable ROIC 17%, using a healthcare-platform multiple of ~28-32x forward earnings gets you to roughly $230-260, not $150. The gap between my $245 midpoint and $353 is ~30% overvaluation — real, but not the -52% the synthesis claims. The synthesis composite is anchoring on mean-reversion assumptions that ignore this company's demonstrated ability to defend margins against every prior competitive threat (Medtronic's earlier attempts, Google/Verb, TransEnterix). If growth stays at 18-20% and margins hold, in three years the multiple compresses naturally and the stock does nothing while earnings catch up — a classic quality-trap outcome rather than a crash setup. The bearish catalyst requires either a genuine procedure-share loss to Hugo/Ottava (watch 2026-2027 print) or a macro/reimbursement shock. Neither is visible in current data. I'd trim above $370, add below $270, and treat $310-340 as fair-hold. Existing holders should not sell aggressively; new capital should wait.
GPT Reading
What stands out is that the business is still compounding at a rate that most “mature earner” labels miss. Revenue went from $7.12B in 2023 to $8.35B in 2024 and $10.06B in 2025, a two-year CAGR around 19%, while net income climbed from $1.80B to $2.32B to $2.86B. The quarterly run-rate keeps confirming that this is not a post-COVID normalization story running out of steam: 2026 Q1 revenue of $2.77B was up 23% from $2.25B a year earlier, and Q2 at $2.89B was up 18% from $2.44B. Net margins are holding near 28-30% even as the company scales, with Q1 2026 at 29.6% and Q2 at 28.3%. That combination—high-teens to low-20s top-line growth, nearly 30% net margins, no debt, and $3.37B of cash—is rare enough that the market is right to grant a premium multiple.
The raw financials tell a very specific story: this is a compounding installed-base model whose earnings quality remains excellent. 2025 operating cash flow was $3.03B against net income of $2.86B, and free cash flow was $2.49B after a meaningful $540M of capex. Gross margin at 66%, operating margin at 29.3%, ROIC at 17.6%, and a current ratio near 4.9 all point to a business with both moat and balance-sheet flexibility. More importantly, revenue is accelerating on a larger base rather than fading: the quarterly sequence from $2.04B in 2024 Q3 to $2.41B, $2.25B, $2.44B, $2.51B, $2.87B, $2.77B, and $2.89B shows some seasonality but a clear upward stair-step. If you are looking for evidence that competition is already denting the economics, it is not in these numbers.
But the stock price is asking investors to pay today for years of this to continue with very little friction. At $353, the company is valued at roughly 12.7x sales, 44.9x earnings, and 34.8x EV/EBITDA. Against 2025 free cash flow of $2.49B, the implied FCF yield is about 2.0%. That is not a medical-device multiple; that is a category-king growth multiple usually reserved for software-like durability. Even if earnings grow another 20% in 2026, the forward P/E only falls into the high 30s. For that to work, Intuitive probably needs to sustain mid-teens revenue growth and preserve near-30% net margins for many years, not just one or two. The company may well do that operationally, but the stock already reflects it. I don’t see obvious room for multiple expansion from here, and with a $126.6B market cap the law of large numbers matters.
The best argument against my caution is straightforward: this is exactly the kind of business that always looks expensive before another five years of compounding. Revenue has added roughly $2.9B in just two years, net income is up more than $1B since 2023, and there is no debt to create balance-sheet risk. If procedure growth, recurring instruments/service mix, and international expansion keep driving 18-20% growth, then a 45x trailing multiple could compress naturally without a stock drawdown. A bull would also argue that the valuation synthesis calling for something like $170 fair value is too mechanistic for a dominant surgical platform with entrenched training, workflow, and installed-base advantages; a standard medtech multiple is probably the wrong lens. I agree with that critique up to a point, which is why I am not outright bearish on the company. I am bearish on the price investors are being asked to pay for excellence that is already obvious.
What would change my mind is either price or proof. On price, a pullback toward $280 would bring the earnings multiple closer to a level where the existing growth and cash generation offer a clearer margin of safety. On proof, I would revisit a more bullish stance if the next few quarters show revenue staying above $2.9B and then crossing $3.0B with net margins still around 29-30%, indicating growth is not merely healthy but re-accelerating on a $11B+ revenue base. Conversely, if revenue growth slips toward low teens or margins drift toward 25-26%, the current valuation will look exposed quickly.
Grok Reading
The numbers describe a business still firing on nearly all cylinders at scale that most medtech franchises never reach. Full-year 2025 revenue hit $10.06B, up 20.5% from $8.35B, itself a solid step up from the mid-teens growth of 2022–23. Trailing quarters show the flywheel intact: Q2 2026 revenue of $2.89B is 18% above the year-ago $2.44B, and net margins are holding in a tight 27–30% band even as the company absorbs whatever mix shift is occurring between systems, instruments, and service. Free cash flow of $2.49B on a pristine, debt-free balance sheet with $3.37B cash and a 4.9 current ratio is the signature of a mature earner that still compounds. The 26% earnings CAGR and 18.9% revenue CAGR over the measured window are not the profile of a company whose growth story is exhausted.
Where the story frays is valuation versus the deceleration signals already visible in the tape. At $353 the stock trades at 44.9x earnings, 12.7x sales, and 34.8x EV/EBITDA—platform multiples that require the installed-base flywheel to keep delivering high-teens-to-20% growth for years without meaningful share leakage. Secondary signals flag the quarterly revenue trend as decelerating, and the jump from $2.51B in Q3 2025 to the $2.8B+ run-rate has not been linear. ROIC of 17.6% and ROE of 15.9% are excellent but not so extraordinary that they alone justify paying nearly 45x for a company whose procedure growth is already being priced as if penetration will double on an accelerated clock. The valuation synthesis’s $150–170 fair-value range is too punitive for this quality of franchise, but the direction of the signal—material premium to fundamentals—is correct. Roughly half the current price is narrative premium for monopoly durability that competition (Hugo already at 150+ sites, Ottava launching into 2026) is actively testing.
The bull case that deserves weight is straightforward: international installed base is still only ~25% against ~50% of global surgical volume, instruments and service remain high-margin recurring streams locked in by surgeon training networks, and 20% growth at a $10B base with 66% gross margins and zero leverage is rare enough that the market has historically been willing to overpay and still compound. FCF conversion is clean, insider activity is noise rather than distribution, and nothing in the income statement yet shows pricing power cracking. A smart opponent would argue that paying 45x for a debt-free 20% grower with a real switching moat has been the winning side of this trade for a decade, and that DCF models systematically undervalue multi-decade installed-base economics.
I still come out overvalued because the implied FCF trajectory needed to justify $353 from here requires an acceleration the recent quarterly pattern does not support, and the competitive set is no longer theoretical. The moat is durable; the multiple assumes it is impregnable and that procedure growth re-accelerates. Those are different claims. I would turn constructive on a sustained re-acceleration of revenue growth back through 22%+ with stable or expanding operating margins above 30%, or on clear evidence that Hugo/Ottava placements are stalling and failing to take share in general surgery. I would turn more decisively negative if trailing procedure growth settles into the low teens while the multiple remains above 40x, or if gross margin compresses through 63% on competitive instrument pricing.
Big-3 Panel — where each AI stands
Advanced Analysis Forensic deep-dive · separate lenses
The business is in excellent shape. Revenue compounded from $5.71B (2021) to $10.06B (2025), a ~15% CAGR, with 2025 growth reaccelerating to ~20% year-over-year. Gross margin sits in the mid-60s (66.0% in 2025, down modestly from 69.3% in 2021 due to newer Ira platform ramp costs), and operating margin recovered from a 2022 trough of 25.3% back to 29.3% in 2025. Net income doubled from $1.32B (2022) to $2.86B (2025), and FCF snapped back to $2.49B after a 2022-2023 dip tied to capital investment. The balance sheet is a fortress: $5.93B liquid cash, effectively zero debt, Altman Z of 32.1 - as safe as public companies get. Earnings integrity is high: OCF/NI 1.09x, accruals -1.1% of assets, Beneish M -2.43 - no manipulation signals. Dilution discipline is intact - diluted shares actually fell slightly (365.8M to 362.7M) with buybacks running 176% of SBC despite SBC at a chunky 7.8% of revenue. Insider tape is neutral: routine option-exercise sales and small programmatic dispositions, no cluster selling of significance ($3.1M over 12 months against a $126B cap is noise). The da Vinci installed base with recurring instrument/accessory revenue provides durable operating leverage that the numbers corroborate.
Verify before trusting this (5)
- 10-K breakdown of recurring instrument/accessory revenue vs system placements to confirm razor-blade mix durability
- Customer/geographic concentration and any China exposure disclosures given cross-border medtech risk
- da Vinci 5 rollout economics and whether GM compression is transient (ramp) or structural
- Litigation/antitrust exposure around service and instrument tying (historical issue for ISRG)
- Details of SBC grants - vesting schedules and whether buyback pace can be sustained alongside them
The e2e composite pegs fair value at $150 and the signal-adjusted at $170, implying -52% downside, but those numbers lean heavily on a DCF ($73) and EPV floor ($56) that look punitive for a business growing 20% with expanding margins and a razor-and-blade annuity - I would not anchor on them literally. The anchored-PE of $400 is the more defensible upper bound for a fortress compounder. Splitting the difference honestly, deserved value sits somewhere in the $200-$240 range: a premium multiple is earned, but $353 still sits ~50-75% above that band.
Verify before trusting this (4)
- Procedure growth durability in next 10-Q (system placements vs instruments/accessories mix)
- Gross margin trajectory - the slow drift flagged by quality lens
- Competitive share commentary on Stryker Mako soft-tissue and CMR Versius traction
- Any change in long-term operating margin guide
The dominant force on ISRG right now is its narrative: a strong, durable platform-monopoly story (da Vinci as standard of care, locked-in surgeons, recurring high-margin revenue) that the market keeps paying up for. That story was just refreshed by a clean Q2 beat (revenue +19% to 2.89B, EPS 2.80 above consensus), which cements the bull framing and starves the bear case of a near-term catalyst. News flow is positive and comparisons to MDT are framing ISRG as the better-positioned med-tech, which keeps analyst tone constructive and momentum (18.9% CAGR, strong_positive) self-reinforcing. The offset is macro: 10y at 4.68% and a market PE of 26.9 are unfriendly to a long-duration, 2x-DCF name with beta 1.46, and the tape is only mildly risk-on (regime +22, nascent). That means any narrative crack or competitor headline (Stryker, CMR shipping alternatives) would hit harder than usual because so much of the price is narrative premium. Net: the story and the print are actively pushing the stock up; macro is a background crosswind, not a decisive press.
Verify before trusting this (4)
- Any competitor procedure-win or system-placement announcement from Stryker, Medtronic Hugo, or CMR that gains media traction
- Analyst target revisions post-Q2 - watch for any downgrade citing valuation rather than fundamentals
- 10y yield breaking above 4.8-5.0%, which would materially pressure long-duration premium names
- Hospital capex commentary from large IDNs signaling reimbursement or budget pressure on robotic systems
This lens hasn't been run for this ticker yet.
Prediction unavailable. No usable fair-value anchor — composite, DCF and anchored-PE are all absent from valuation-synthesis. Typical for pre-profit / narrative-platform names where those methods don't apply.