Skip to main content
Homepage
Full 18-step deep-dive · ~20–30 min · a member feature.
AGING Analysis Report
Aug 15, 2026
8 days ago · 100% complete
NOT DEPENDABLE This report predates a filing — its financial basis has been replaced.
Report generated: Aug 15, 2026 · Filing on record since: Aug 22, 2026 · 6 days after
For AI assistants & researchers — machine-readable summary of this page

What this page is: Delvantic's full research page for Lemaitre Vascular Inc. (LMAT) — 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 -5 (−100…+100 Quality+Value blend) · Quality 73 · Value -69 · Sentiment -39 (timing only, not weighted)

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 cap
  • extended-analysisthe core: three AI lens reads with findings, scores, and the analyst memo
  • future-predictions — our forward price-band predictions
  • market-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.

Lemaitre Vascular Inc.

LMAT NASDAQ
Healthcare · Medical Instruments & Supplies
Burlington, MA 01803, United States lemaitre.com Updated Aug 15, 1:00pm
Price
$82.38
Market Cap
$1.9B
Employees
646
Beta
0.52
Avg Volume
383,363
Last Dividend
$0.95
CEO
Mr. George W. LeMaitre

LeMaitre Vascular Inc. develops, manufactures, and markets specialized medical devices and implants designed for vascular surgery and the treatment of peripheral vascular disease. The company offers a comprehensive portfolio of products across six key categories: aortic, arteriovenous access, cardiac, carotid, lower extremity, and neuro applications. Its product lines include allografts—cryopreserved human tissue grafts used in vascular reconstruction—embolectomy catheters for removing blood clots from arteries, thrombectomy catheters for venous thrombi removal, and various synthetic and biologic grafts and patches. LeMaitre also provides human tissue cryopreservation services. The company distributes its products globally through direct sales to hospitals in over 25 countries and through distributors in more than 70 countries across North America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific. Founded in 1986 and headquartered in Burlington, Massachusetts, LeMaitre serves vascular surgeons performing both open surgical procedures and minimally invasive interventions, with the majority of its revenue generated from the United States market.

Runs with full report Generated: Aug 15, 2026 1:05pm
Price Overview
Price at report time
$82.38
as of Aug 15, 1:01pm (8d ago)
Change · Aug 15
+0.45 (+0.55%)
Day Range
$80.72 – $82.61
52-Week Range
$78.65 – $118.01
50-Day MA
$95.33
200-Day MA
$95.49
Volume
553,300.00
Right now · live
Log in to get the live feed
Members see the real-time price and the move since this report (over 8d).
Share Structure
Outstanding 22,864,935.00
Float 21,299,969.00
Free Float 93.2%
High free float — 93.2% of shares trade freely, ~6.8% held by insiders/institutions
Very liquid — most shares trade freely. Low insider ownership can mean less management alignment, but makes large position sizing straightforward.
Price History (1 Year)
Last updated: Aug 15, 2026 1:09pm (8d ago)
Revenue & Net Income Trend
The directional story — useful even when net income is negative.
Last updated: Aug 15, 2026 1:09pm (8d ago)
Revenue
The top line — total sales before any costs or taxes are subtracted. A measure of how much business the company is doing.
Net Income
The bottom line — profit left after subtracting all expenses, interest, and taxes from revenue. Reflects accounting profitability, but includes non-cash items like depreciation, so it isn't the same as cash earned.
Operating Cash Flow
The real cash generated by the day-to-day business — selling products, paying suppliers, collecting from customers. Calculated from net income by adding back non-cash items and adjusting for timing (unpaid bills, unsold inventory). When OCF consistently lags net income, the reported profit may not be converting to real money.
Period Revenue Net Income Net Margin YoY/QoQ
Key Metrics
TD Twelve Data statement HEX SEC filing
Industry comparison last run: Aug 15, 2026 1:05pm
P/E Ratio (Price per dollar of earnings)
HEX
Stock Price / EPS (Diluted)
32.69
Stock Price: $82.38
EPS (Diluted): 2.52
P/B Ratio (Price vs net asset value)
HEX
Stock Price / Book Value Per Share
4.80
Stock Price: $82.38
Total Equity: $393.52M
Shares: 22,929,000
EV/EBITDA (Total value vs operating profit)
HEX
Enterprise Value / EBITDA
23.45
Market Cap: $1.88B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $28.24M
EBITDA: $78.33M
Enterprise Value (Takeover price (cap + debt - cash))
HEX
Market Cap + Total Debt - Cash
$1.8B
Market Cap: $1.88B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $28.24M
Gross Margin (Revenue left after direct costs)
HEX
Gross Profit / Revenue
71.5%
Gross Profit: $178.54M
Revenue: $249.60M
Operating Margin (Revenue left after all operations)
HEX
Operating Income / Revenue
27.2%
Operating Income: $67.91M
Revenue: $249.60M
Net Margin (Revenue left as actual profit)
HEX
Net Income / Revenue
23.1%
Net Income: $57.73M
Revenue: $249.60M
ROE (Profit from shareholder equity)
HEX
Net Income / Total Equity
14.7%
Net Income: $57.73M
Total Equity: $393.52M
ROIC (Profit from all invested capital)
HEX
NOPAT / Invested Capital
14.3%
Operating Income: $67.91M
Tax Rate: 23.2%
Equity: $393.52M
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $28.24M
Zero debt — invested capital = equity minus cash (very efficient)
Current Ratio (Can it pay short-term bills)
HEX
Current Assets / Current Liabilities
12.89
Current Assets: $468.23M
Current Liabilities: $36.32M
Debt/Equity (Leverage — debt vs equity)
HEX
Total Debt / Total Equity
0.00
Short-Term Debt: $0.00
Long-Term Debt: $0.00
Total Debt: $0.00
Total Equity: $393.52M
Zero debt — this company carries no debt obligations. Strongest possible score.
Rev/Share (Top-line per share)
HEX
Revenue / Shares Outstanding
$10.89
Revenue: $249.60M
Shares: 22,929,000
Book Value/Share (Net assets per share)
HEX
(Total Assets - Total Liabilities) / Shares
$17.16
Total Equity: $393.52M
Shares: 22,929,000
FCF/Share (Real cash generated per share)
HEX
(Operating Cash Flow + CapEx) / Shares
$3.25
Operating CF: $81.25M
CapEx: -$6.78M
Shares: 22,929,000
CapEx is negative (outflow) — added to OCF to get FCF
Div Yield (Annual income from holding)
TD
Last Annual Dividend / Stock Price
1.2%
Last Dividend: $0.95
Stock Price: $82.38
Payout Ratio (Earnings paid out as dividends)
HEX
Dividends Paid / Net Income
31.4%
Dividends Paid: -$18.11M
Net Income: $57.73M
Industry Benchmarks
Last run: Aug 15, 2026 1:05pm
Compares LMAT against LLM-researched typical ranges for its industry. One research call per industry, cached indefinitely — every stock in the same industry reuses the same baseline.
Income Statement (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 15, 2026 1:09pm (8d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Revenue $154.4M $161.7M $193.5M $219.9M $249.6M
Cost of Revenue $53.0M $56.8M $66.4M $69.0M $71.1M
Gross Profit $101.4M $104.9M $127.0M $150.9M $178.5M
Operating Expenses $65.0M $78.1M $90.3M $98.6M $110.6M
Operating Income $36.4M $26.8M $36.7M $52.3M $67.9M
Net Income $26.9M $20.6M $30.1M $44.0M $57.7M
EBITDA $47.5M $36.3M $46.2M $61.9M $78.3M
EPS $1.27 $0.94 $1.36 $1.96 $2.55
EPS (Diluted) $1.25 $0.93 $1.34 $1.93 $2.52
Balance Sheet (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 15, 2026 1:00pm (8d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Cash & Equivalents $13.9M $19.1M $24.3M $25.6M $28.2M
Total Current Assets $139.9M $161.7M $194.6M $402.2M $468.2M
Total Assets $292.8M $310.5M $346.8M $551.8M $615.7M
Current Liabilities $21.8M $25.3M $29.9M $30.6M $36.3M
Long-Term Debt
Total Liabilities $38.7M $42.3M $48.9M $214.5M $222.2M
Total Equity $254.2M $268.2M $297.9M $337.3M $393.5M
Retained Earnings $88.1M $97.8M $115.4M $145.1M $184.7M
Cash Flow (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 15, 2026 1:09pm (8d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Operating Cash Flow $35.1M $25.4M $36.8M $44.1M $81.3M
Capital Expenditure -$4.9M -$3.2M -$7.3M -$7.0M -$6.8M
Free Cash Flow $30.2M $22.1M $29.5M $37.2M $74.5M
Acquisitions (net) $0 $0 $-899,000 $0 -$1.9M
Net Debt Issued / (Repaid) $0 $0 $169.3M $0
Dividends Paid -$9.3M -$11.0M -$12.4M -$14.4M -$18.1M
Stock Buybacks $-802,000 $-642,000 $-853,000 -$1.7M -$1.8M
Net Change in Cash -$12.9M $5.3M $5.1M $1.3M $2.6M
Growth Trends (YoY %)
Last updated: Aug 15, 2026 1:09pm (8d ago)
Metric 2022 2023 2024 2025
Revenue Growth +4.7% +19.7% +13.6% +13.5%
Gross Profit Growth +3.5% +21.1% +18.8% +18.3%
Operating Income Growth -26.3% +36.8% +42.3% +30.0%
Net Income Growth -23.3% +45.9% +46.3% +31.1%
EBITDA Growth -23.7% +27.5% +34.0% +26.5%
Dividend History (Last 20)
Last updated: Aug 15, 2026 1:01pm (8d ago)
Date Dividend Declaration Record Payment
2026-08-20 $0.25
2026-05-21 $0.25
2026-03-12 $0.25
2025-11-20 $0.20
2025-08-21 $0.20
2025-05-15 $0.20
2025-03-13 $0.20
2024-11-21 $0.16
2024-08-15 $0.16
2024-05-15 $0.16
2024-03-13 $0.16
2023-11-15 $0.14
2023-08-16 $0.14
2023-05-16 $0.14
2023-03-08 $0.14
2022-11-16 $0.13
2022-08-24 $0.13
2022-05-16 $0.13
2022-03-07 $0.13
2021-11-18 $0.11
0Company Classification 1Industry Landscape 2Company Momentum 3Forward Projection 4aDCF Valuation 4bEarnings Power Value 4cAnchored PE 4dReverse DCF 4eRevenue-Based DCF 4fAnchored P/S 4gScenario Analysis 4hDividend Discount Model 4iBook Value Analysis 4jInsider Activity 4fCash Flow Quality 4gDebt Maturity Risk 4hMacro Environment 4iSector Intelligence 4jRevenue Confidence 4kSensitivity Analysis 4lSector Demand Cycle 5AI Investigation 5bThesis Evaluation 6Valuation Synthesis
computed not applicable not yet run 12 computed · 6 not applicable · 6 not yet run
Narrative Economics
The story the market is telling about this stock — the intangible X-factor (founder mythology, cult dynamics, TAM-of-imagination) that moves price beyond what cash flows alone explain. After Shiller, Narrative Economics.
No narrative profile yet for LMAT — it's generated by the pipeline (market-narrative step).
AI Lens 4th lens · how AI reaches this business · 5-yr
2026-08-15
The creme is there an opportunity here? Neutral
AI is not the axis this stock turns on — exposure is genuinely low, and that is the finding.
Exposure 21 with position 57: physical implants, cleared portfolios and cryopreserved tissue sit outside AI's blast radius, and the honest AI contribution is a modest overhead-leverage tailwind on top of an already 27.2% operating margin plus a free volume kicker if AI imaging raises PAD/carotid detection rates. Do not credit the 65.7%→71.5% gross margin climb to AI — that is price and mix, and the one AI-adjacent danger is hospital procurement analytics making that premium harder to defend. Watch quarterly ASP commentary and SG&A as a share of revenue; underwrite this name on pricing power and tuck-in M&A, not on any AI narrative.
57
AI Position
Low exposure — physical implants, modest back-office leverage
LeMaitre sells surgeon-implanted physical devices and human tissue under FDA clearance; cheap intelligence barely touches the value proposition and mostly shows up as incremental leverage in regulatory, R&D and sales-support cost.
Exposure 21 Confidence 74 50 = neutral ⚑ fingerprint implies 76
Primary Tailwind

AI compresses the non-manufacturing overhead of a small-cap device firm — regulatory submissions, EU MDR/CE dossier maintenance, clinical literature work, complaint handling and multi-language sales support — where LeMaitre carries unusually high fixed cost per dollar of revenue given ~$250M sales across dozens of SKUs and geographies.

Primary Pressure

Nothing in AI directly threatens the revenue unit; the real risk is that AI-assisted procurement analytics and GPO benchmarking make LeMaitre's per-unit price premium on catheters, patches and grafts more visible and harder to hold, since price/mix has been a core driver of the 65.7%→71.5% gross margin climb.

Critical Hinge

Whether the pricing engine keeps working: watch reported average selling price growth and gross margin per quarter. AI matters to this name only through hospital purchasing sophistication, not through product substitution.

Forensic fingerprint same 11 factors for every stock · 0 unfavorable · 50 neutral · 100 favorable
Underlying Need Persistence do people still need this at all? 94
Vascular disease treatment in an aging population is demographically anchored and physical.
Occluded arteries, aneurysms and dialysis access needs require mechanical intervention; no amount of cheap intelligence removes the requirement for a graft, patch or embolectomy catheter.
PAD/carotid procedure volume trends · aging-demographic surgical caseloads · dialysis access population growth
relevance 80 · confidence 90
Solution Persistence will they still solve it this way? 86
The implant-and-catheter solution form is stable; competing shifts are clinical, not AI-driven.
Substitution risk comes from endovascular vs open surgical technique migration and drug therapy, which are medical trends independent of machine intelligence.
open vs endovascular mix shifts · new PAD drug therapy data · allograft vs synthetic preference
relevance 70 · confidence 78
Intelligence Commoditization does cheap AI power them or copy them? 58
Cheap AI powers LeMaitre's paperwork and design cycle far more than it copies its products.
Simulation and regulatory drafting get cheaper for everyone, but the binding constraints — sterile manufacturing, tissue sourcing, clearances, surgeon trust — are not software.
R&D spend per new clearance · time from design to 510(k) · competitor product launch cadence
relevance 35 · confidence 65
Responsibility Transfer are they paid to take the blame? 78
LeMaitre owns device liability and tissue-processing accountability that no hospital wants.
Implantable devices and cryopreserved human allografts carry regulatory and litigation responsibility the customer explicitly outsources to the manufacturer.
recall or FDA warning letters · MDR/CE compliance costs · product liability reserve moves
relevance 55 · confidence 72
Scarcity Migration do their assets get rarer or more common? 72
Scarcity sits in cleared portfolio breadth, tissue supply and specialist reps — all AI-resistant.
As software abundance rises, the relatively rarer assets become donor-tissue processing capability, niche clearances and a trained vascular sales force calling on a small surgeon population.
allograft supply and processing capacity · sales rep count and productivity · new geography clearance additions
relevance 60 · confidence 70
Customer DIY Preference will customers just build it themselves? 92
No hospital will manufacture vascular implants in-house regardless of AI capability.
The DIY question is essentially void here — the barrier is manufacturing, regulation and liability, not knowledge.
hospital in-house device programs · 3D-printed graft pilot programs · tissue bank vertical integration
relevance 45 · confidence 88
AI Intermediation Position do AI agents go through them or around them? 52
Purchasing agents, not clinical agents, are the intermediation channel — and they favor price.
AI does not route procedures, but AI-assisted GPO and supply-chain tools could increasingly mediate what a hospital is willing to pay for a niche premium catheter.
GPO contract renewal terms · hospital procurement analytics adoption · ASP disclosure per quarter
relevance 30 · confidence 58
Data Leverage does their data make AI better? 41
LeMaitre holds little proprietary data of AI value; its edge is physical and regulatory.
Device sales generate no meaningful longitudinal clinical dataset the company monetizes; imaging and outcomes data sit with hospitals and imaging vendors.
any clinical registry investments · outcomes data partnerships · software/service revenue emergence
relevance 30 · confidence 60
AI Margin Conversion do the AI savings become profit? 62
Overhead savings plausibly stick because pricing is set clinically, not by cost pass-through.
With 71.5% gross margin and 27.2% operating margin already expanding on price and scale, incremental AI-driven cuts in regulatory, quality and support cost fall largely to operating income rather than being competed away in a fragmented niche.
SG&A as percent of revenue · headcount vs revenue growth · operating margin path above 27%
relevance 55 · confidence 62
Revenue Unit Durability does the thing they charge for survive? 88
The monetized unit is a physical consumable/implant per procedure — AI cannot dematerialize it.
Revenue scales with surgical cases and device units, a unit that cheap intelligence cannot unbundle the way it unbundles seats or billable hours.
unit volume vs price contribution · procedure-driven reorder rates · mix shift toward lower-ASP items
relevance 75 · confidence 82
Entrant Compression how easily can newcomers copy them? 66
AI lowers design cost but not clinical evidence, clearance or distribution cost in a small market.
The addressable niches are too small and the regulatory/sales burden too high for AI-native startups; the credible competitive threat remains large strategics, not cheap software.
new 510(k) entrants in niches · large strategics entering small niches · M&A target pricing inflation
relevance 60 · confidence 66

AI Lens thesis

The need — repairing and clearing diseased vessels in an aging population — is physical and growing, and the solution is a sterile implant or catheter in a surgeon's hand with FDA/CE clearance and product liability attached, none of which cheap software reproduces. AI reaches LeMaitre in three thin channels: (1) internal cost — regulatory writing, quality systems, tissue-processing documentation, and a direct sales force of specialist reps who can be made more productive per territory; (2) demand — AI-read CT/ultrasound and screening algorithms plausibly increase diagnosed PAD, carotid and aortic disease, which widens the procedure funnel LeMaitre sells into; (3) competition — AI lowers the cost of design and simulation but not of clinical evidence, cryopreserved tissue supply chains, sterile manufacturing, or 25 years of surgeon relationships in a market too small to attract a well-funded AI-native entrant. Net: mildly favorable, structurally minor. The company's margin expansion is a pricing-and-scale story, not an AI story, and should not be credited to AI.

Thesis breaker A visible step-down in ASPs or gross margin alongside hospital adoption of AI-driven supplier consolidation tools would convert this from 'insulated' to 'quietly pressured'; conversely, SG&A falling as a share of revenue while headcount flattens would confirm real AI cost leverage.
What the market may be underestimating

Upside AI-assisted imaging screening expanding diagnosed carotid and aortic disease volumes is a free volume tailwind LeMaitre captures without spending anything — device demand rises with detection rates it does not have to fund.

Downside LeMaitre's growth depends heavily on acquiring small niche device lines; if AI-inflated software valuations and cheaper product development spawn more bidders or make targets believe they can go direct, the roll-up arithmetic that underpins mid-teens growth gets more expensive.

Outcome range spread 25

44Bear case
57Central case
69Bull case
Three headline numbers, deliberately never blended: Position (which way), Exposure (how much it matters at all), Confidence (how sure). The fingerprint asks every stock the same 11 questions so companies a sector label would lump together get told apart. Not an input to GEM/Coal or the Q/V/S lenses.
Growth Outlook
Analyzed 2026-08-17 16:35

The question every valuation on this page silently assumes: is this company likely to grow? Judged forward — the business, its category, the world — against what's already printed.

Growing Durable low-double-digit organic growth (price + niche vascular volumes) with faster earnings expansion, but the pace is decaying and nowhere near the ~27% the price mathematically assumes. conf 8/10
Inline with category Category growing · Category median recent growth is 13.5% and industry revenue CAGR 14.6% with margins expanding industry-wide; LMAT's recent revenue YoY is 13.5% organic-plus and 11.2% in the newest matched quarter — essentially at the category rate, with earnings growth (38.5% CAGR) roughly in line with the industry's margin-expansion trend. LMAT is holding share inside a growing category rather than taking it, though it holds a defensible niche position within its sub-segments.
Next 2 quarters
Growing
Order patterns are consumable and recurring, the price-increase cycle is already embedded in the run rate, and operating leverage keeps earnings growth well ahead of revenue. Expect continued high-single to low-double-digit revenue with outsized EBIT growth — but not re-acceleration, given the decelerating quarterly trend and the -9% miss on the newest print.
≈ inline with expectations
Year 1
Growing
Full-year setup is the same machine: mid-single-digit price, low-single-digit volume, possible tuck-in contribution, and continued gross-margin recovery. That supports low-double-digit revenue and mid-to-high-teens earnings growth for the fiscal year — the house's 12.1% projection is the right neighborhood.
≈ inline with expectations
Years 2–3
Growing
Structural earnings power grows: aging demographics, niche defensibility, and margin expansion runway are all intact, and the balance sheet funds repeatable tuck-ins. But the growth rate itself decays as pricing headroom narrows in a finite TAM — call it low-double-digit revenue, mid-teens earnings, i.e. Growing rather than Accelerating.
↓ below expectations
The creme: each rung's call measured against what's already printed (vs analyst estimates · vs guidance / FY consensus · vs price-implied growth) — expectations in print are already in the price, so only the variant margin can pay. Hover a rung's chip for the margin read.
Growth drivers
69 Structural price-led revenue engine — LeMaitre's model is annual list-price increases across low-competition, low-cost-per-procedure disposables (embolectomy/thrombectomy catheters, patches, shunts) that hospitals rarely tender aggressively. This is why revenue has compounded 13.6% CAGR with unusually low volatility (0.0005) and all years positive — growth is manufactured, not cycle-dependent.
58 Operating leverage on a fixed sales/manufacturing base — Operating income +40.8% on revenue +11.2% in the newest matched quarter, and a 38.5% earnings CAGR vs 13.6% revenue CAGR. Gross-margin gains (in-sourcing, allograft yield, mix toward biologics) plus a direct sales force already built out mean incremental revenue drops through at high margin. Earnings growth should keep outrunning revenue growth even if revenue merely holds.
47 Demographic-anchored procedure demand — Peripheral vascular disease, aortic and carotid intervention volumes track an aging population and are largely non-deferrable once symptomatic. This insulates LMAT from the capex-driven weakness flagged in the sector's contraction read — LMAT sells consumables and implants, not capital equipment.
32 Tuck-in M&A optionality — The historical playbook is buying small vascular product lines and repricing/reselling them through the existing direct rep network. With a clean balance sheet and high FCF conversion (59% FCF CAGR), this is a repeatable +2-4pt revenue adder that consensus models only partially embed.
Growth risks
56 Quarterly trend already decelerating — Revenue confidence flags the quarterly trend as 'decelerating': newest matched-quarter revenue +11.2% vs multi-year 13.6% CAGR. Price increases face diminishing headroom after several aggressive years, and reps-per-territory additions have a saturation point. The base case drifts toward high-single/low-double digits, not re-acceleration.
64 Small addressable market caps the ceiling — Vascular surgery consumables is a niche with a finite TAM; LMAT is already the primary supplier in several sub-segments. There is no plausible mechanism — no new modality, no reimbursement inflection — that lifts organic growth into the mid-20s for a decade, which is what the price-implied 26.9% requires.
41 Hospital consolidation / GPO pricing pressure — The price-taking dynamic that has powered growth is exactly what consolidated purchasing organizations attack. Any shift from annual price increases to flat contracts removes several points of revenue growth and the associated margin expansion simultaneously.
29 Estimate slippage on the most recent print — Newest print missed at 0.74 vs 0.81 est (-9%) after several beats — evidence that cost, FX, or tissue-processing (allograft) variability can break the smooth-beat pattern. Near-term prints are less reliably above the line than the 2025-2026 record implies.
18 Sector demand phase in contraction — Medical Instruments & Supplies demand score -2 with capex and revenue indicators weakening; macro headwinds with 10y at 4.63 pressure hospital budgets. Less relevant to consumables than to equipment, but it caps upside surprise on volume.
The world is aging and vascular disease burden compounds with it; that demand is procedural, non-discretionary once symptomatic, and delivered through surgeons who value tool familiarity — a durable moat for a direct-sales niche supplier. The offsetting force is buyer consolidation: hospital systems and GPOs are professionalizing procurement precisely against low-visibility, high-margin disposables, and LMAT's growth formula leans on annual price increases. Higher-for-longer rates (10y 4.63) tighten hospital budgets and raise the bar for M&A math, while the sector's contraction phase is concentrated in capital equipment rather than implants and consumables — so LMAT is on the right side of the sector's split. Net: a business whose demand is close to weather-proof, whose pricing lever is finite, and whose realistic long-run trajectory is low-double-digit revenue with mid-teens earnings, not a mid-20s compounder.
Growth position composite +6
ShrinkingStallingHoldingGrowingAccelerating
70Next 2 quarters · Growing
70Year 1 · Growing
70Years 2–3 · Growing
+6Composite (−100…+100)
A research prediction, not advice. Forward-graded: each rung is scored against the prints that follow it. Not an input to the GEM designation — track record first.
Claude Reading
Independent analyst synthesis · claude-opus-4-7 · generated 2026-08-15 13:08:39
Verdict Fairly valued near $82 — synthesis $45-53 FV is too punitive; my range is $70-85 given demonstrated 19% YoY revenue growth and 30% FCF margins, but no margin of safety to add here.

Looking at the raw numbers first: LMAT has printed eight consecutive quarters of expansion, with revenue climbing from $55.8M (Q2'24) to $66.6M (Q1'26) — that's ~19% YoY on the most recent print, actually accelerating from the 13.5% "recent YoY" the momentum module cites. Net margin has structurally re-rated from ~20% to ~24%, with a Q3'25 spike to 28.4% (likely one-off). Annual op margin went from 16.6% (2022) to 27.2% (2025) — that's a 1,060bp expansion on a 55% revenue base expansion. FCF of $74.5M on $249.6M revenue = 29.8% FCF margin, with essentially zero debt and $28M cash. This is a pristine balance sheet compounding at ~14% top-line with expanding profitability. The "decelerating quarterly trend" flag looks wrong to me — Q1'26 at $66.6M is a sequential high and up 11.2% from Q1'25's $59.9M ex-seasonality.

Where I disagree with the synthesis: a $45.79 composite fair value (implying -44% downside) reads as a DCF crank job using conservative reversion assumptions on a company that just demonstrated the opposite. At $82.38, EV/FCF is roughly 25x on TTM FCF that grew 59% CAGR. P/E of 32.7x on a business compounding earnings at 30%+ with 15% ROE, zero leverage, and 72% gross margins isn't cheap but it isn't egregious either — it's roughly a PEG of 1.0-1.1 if you believe even half the earnings trajectory persists. The Market Forces module calling this "harvest mode" with "deteriorating strategic positioning" contradicts the actual numbers: harvest-mode companies don't post 19% YoY revenue with 400bp of margin expansion. That signal appears to be pattern-matching on "open surgery" keywords rather than reading the P&L. The Narrative module's framing is more honest — the price embeds continued execution, and the question is durability, not whether the current run is real.

The contrarian case worth taking seriously: margin expansion from 20% to 24% net over two years in a medtech niche is unusual and mean-reverting risk is real. If the Q3'25 28.4% margin was a mix/pricing anomaly (Q4'25 already came back to 24.2%, Q1'26 to 23.6%), the "structural" gain may be more like 300bp, not 400bp. Allograft supply is a real moat but also a real constraint — you can't scale donor tissue infinitely, which caps volume growth even as pricing holds. Insider data is unusable (all showing 0-1 share awards on 2026-06-04, clearly a data artifact, not the "unusual selling" the secondary signal claims — another module I'd discount). The stock is down from $118 to $82 (-30%), and that de-rating has already happened; buyers here aren't paying peak multiples. At the 2024 low-water valuation the P/E was arguably richer relative to then-current growth.

My read: the synthesis verdict of $45-53 fair value is too harsh and appears to over-weight reversion assumptions while under-weighting the demonstrated eight-quarter operating leverage story. But at $82 with a 32x P/E, this isn't a table-pounding buy either — you're paying for continued execution in a business where the law of large numbers eventually bites (though $250M revenue in a fragmented vascular market is nowhere near that ceiling). Fair value in my framework is closer to $70-85: 25-28x forward earnings of ~$3.00-3.20/share, which implies the stock is roughly fairly valued to modestly rich, not 35% overvalued. The bigger risk than valuation is a single soft quarter puncturing the compounder narrative — with the stock already off 30% from highs, the market is watching. I'd wait for either a pullback to the low $70s or a Q2'26 print confirming the acceleration before adding; existing holders should sit tight. The synthesis and Market Forces modules are meaningfully too bearish given what the actual quarterly cadence shows.

GPT Reading
Independent reading · gpt-5.4 · generated 2026-08-15 13:08:56
Verdict Fairly valued to modestly undervalued at $82.38 — the debt-free, 27% operating margin niche medtech compounder deserves a premium, with fair value roughly $80-$95 if double-digit growth holds.

What jumps out is not a broken story but a very small medtech franchise executing at a level that usually commands a premium. Revenue has gone from $154.4M in 2021 to $249.6M in 2025, a 13%-plus CAGR, while operating income nearly doubled from $36.4M to $67.9M despite 2022 being a reset year. The more recent cadence is even better: quarterly sales rose from $55.8M in 2024-06 to $66.6M in 2026-03, and the latest quarter was up 11.2% year over year from $59.9M. Net income growth has outpaced sales, from $44.0M in 2024 to $57.7M in 2025, and the last four quarters sum to roughly $62.5M of earnings, implying the current price is closer to 30x run-rate earnings than the headline 32.7x trailing figure. For a debt-free company with 71.5% gross margin, 27.2% operating margin, 23.1% net margin, and $74.5M of free cash flow on $249.6M of sales, that multiple is rich but not absurd. This is not a speculative device story; it is already producing roughly 30% FCF conversion on sales and an FCF yield around 4% on the current market cap.

The key fact the “overvalued” models can miss is that the margin structure appears to have genuinely stepped up rather than merely spiked. Annual operating margin has expanded from 19.0% in 2023 to 23.8% in 2024 to 27.2% in 2025, and quarterly net margins have mostly stayed in the low-20s or better, even touching 28.4% in 2025-09. That matters because valuation based on older normalized margins will understate earnings power. The balance sheet also gives this business a quality premium: no debt, $28.2M cash, current ratio near 13x, and ROIC of 14.3% without leverage. In small-cap medtech, a niche leader that self-funds growth and converts earnings into cash this cleanly often deserves to trade well above the market. At $82.38, investors are paying about 7.6x sales and 23.4x EV/EBITDA; those are full multiples, but for a company compounding revenue low-teens while earnings compound much faster, I think they are within a reasonable band rather than clearly bubble-like.

My read is therefore more constructive than the synthesis that pegs fair value in the low-$50s. That conclusion feels too anchored to generic mature-industrial math and not enough to the actual trajectory here. If LeMaitre can sustain even 10-12% sales growth and hold operating margin around 27-28%, earnings power can keep compounding into the low-to-mid teens without financial engineering. On a forward earnings base that could plausibly exceed $65M within a year, a 28-32x multiple gets you roughly the current price to low-$90s before giving any credit for further mix improvement or tuck-in optionality. I do not see obvious evidence in the raw numbers of a business rolling over; if anything, 2026-03 showed re-acceleration versus the late-2024 base.

The best bear case is straightforward: this is still a $250M-revenue company in a slow-changing medtech niche, and the stock already discounts an awful lot of excellence. Sequentially, revenue has not climbed in a straight line — $64.2M in 2025-06 fell to $61.0M in 2025-09 before recovering, and 2026-03 at $66.6M is only modestly above 2025-06. If growth slips from low teens to high single digits while margins simply plateau, 30x earnings and 7.6x sales can compress quickly into the 20s P/E and 5-6x sales, which would indeed imply a price much closer to $60 than $80. The latest insider blotter is not helpful, though the data shown look more like awards than informative open-market transactions. And because this is already at 4.8x book and pays only a 1.15% dividend, there is not much valuation support if the “premium compounder” label gets revoked.

What would change my mind is not a one-quarter wiggle but evidence that the operating step-up was temporary. If revenue growth falls below 8% year over year for two consecutive quarters while net margin drifts back toward 18-20%, I would stop treating the current valuation as defendable and would likely move to clearly overvalued. Conversely, if the company prints another couple of quarters around $67-70M in revenue with net income staying above $15M per quarter, the market will have further proof that the higher margin base is durable, and $82 will look fair to slightly cheap rather than expensive.

Grok Reading
Independent reading · grok-4.5 · generated 2026-08-15 13:09:49
Verdict Modestly overvalued at $82.38; elite 71% gross / 23% net margins and $74.5M FCF justify a quality premium, but 33× earnings vs decelerating ~13% growth points to ~$68–73 fair value

The numbers describe a high-quality niche compounder that has already delivered the hard part. Revenue climbed from $154.4M in 2021 to $249.6M in 2025 (13.6% CAGR), while net income more than doubled from $26.9M to $57.7M and free cash flow reached $74.5M against only $6.8M of capex. Operating margin expanded from the low-20s to 27.2% and net margin hit 23.1%, with gross margin locked near 71.5%. The balance sheet is pristine—zero debt, $28.2M cash, current ratio nearly 13—and ROIC of 14.3% shows the capital is earning its keep. Recent quarters remain solid: the March 2026 print of $66.6M revenue and 23.6% net margin sits comfortably above the year-earlier $59.9M / 18.4%. This is not a story of aspirational margins; the company is already running at elite medical-device profitability and converting almost every incremental dollar into cash.

What the quantitative models miss is how badly their own DCF anchors contradict the reported economics. The narrative layer admits the DCF is built on ~8% EBIT margins while the company just printed 27% operating margin and $67.9M of operating income. That single assumption alone collapses the $45–53 “fair value” range; a business throwing off $74.5M of FCF with no leverage and mid-teens top-line growth is simply not worth 12–14× free cash flow. At $82.38 the stock trades at roughly 25× trailing FCF and 33× earnings—rich, but nowhere near the 35% overvaluation the composite claims once realistic margins are restored. The 30% drawdown from the $118 high has already excised a good portion of the prior exuberance.

The bear case that still carries weight is deceleration plus strategic risk. Quarterly revenue growth has cooled into the low double-digits, the secondary signals flag a decelerating trend, and the open-surgery vascular franchise sits on the wrong side of the long-term shift toward endovascular techniques. Hospital GPO pressure and a $250M revenue base limit the runway for another 400 bp of margin expansion; the 38.5% earnings CAGR of the last several years is mathematically unlikely to repeat. At 7.6× sales and 23× EV/EBITDA the market is still paying for continued mid-teens growth and stable-to-rising margins—exactly the scenario that fails if unit growth slows further or pricing power erodes. Insider filings are noise (mostly 1-share awards), so they neither confirm nor refute the thesis.

I still land modestly negative on valuation because 33× earnings leaves little room for the very deceleration the data already hint at, and the niche TAM does not justify compounder multiples forever. A fair range nearer $68–73 (roughly 22–24× trailing earnings or ~20× FCF) better matches a high-teens ROIC business whose growth is rolling over from 14% toward low double-digits. The quality premium is real; the current price simply overpays for its persistence.

What would flip me is evidence that growth is re-accelerating rather than fading—specifically two consecutive quarters of ≥15% revenue growth with operating margin holding above 26%, or a clear international/allograft mix shift that lifts the forward revenue CAGR back above 14% while FCF stays above $80M. Conversely, a print showing revenue growth below 8% or gross margin compression below 68% would confirm the overvaluation and push fair value into the low $60s.

Big-3 Panel — where each AI stands
Each AI above independently stated a direction (undervalued, fairly valued, or overvalued) and how strongly it believes it (conviction, 0–5). We combine those into a Bull-Bear Index on a 0–10 scale: 5 is neutral, 10 is maximum bullish (undervalued at full conviction), 0 is maximum bearish. We compute the score ourselves with the same arithmetic for every seat — the models never grade their own bullishness — so the three are directly comparable. Δ shows how far each seat sits from the panel average of 4.0; a large Δ marks the dissenting voice, usually the one worth reading.
Claude claude-opus-4-7 5.0
fairly valued · conviction 3/5 · Δ +1.0 vs panel · self: 6.0
GPT gpt-5.4 5.0
fairly valued · conviction 3/5 · Δ +1.0 vs panel · self: 6.0
Grok grok-4.5 2.0
overvalued · conviction 3/5 · Δ -2.0 vs panel · self: 4.0
Advanced Analysis Forensic deep-dive · separate lenses
Separate reads — Company Quality (is it a great business?), Valuation (is it mispriced?), and General Sentiment (how macro + narrative are pushing it), plus AI Impact (how the AI wave reshapes it), kept deliberately apart · 2026-08-15 13:12:28
Delvantic - Cairn AI
Great business, rich price - wait for a dip 7/10
Genuinely strong small-cap medtech compounder priced for perfection right after a guide-down - pass here, buy the disappointment.
The cruxWhether the Q2 miss/Q3 guide-down is a one-quarter wobble or the start of growth normalization - that determines if the ~35% gap between $82 price and ~$53-60 deserved value ever closes to a buyable level.
Forensic checks Derived mechanically from LMAT's filed financials — not from the AI lenses
Liquidity & RunwaySelf-Funding
DilutionStable Share Count
Earnings QualityHigh Earnings Quality
The four lensesswitch a tab for its full read — score + evidence
Company Quality
+73
Strong
edge √Σ 136 · risk √Σ 43 · conf 8/10

LeMaitre has compounded revenue from 154M in 2021 to 250M in 2025 (roughly 13% CAGR) while gross margin expanded from 65.7% to 71.5% and operating margin from 23.6% to 27.2%. Net income more than doubled from 27M to 58M, and FCF stepped up decisively to 74.5M in 2025 (OCF/NI 1.23x, accruals -2% of assets) - cash generation is real, not accrual-driven. Altman Z of 7.12 and Beneish M of -2.61 corroborate a clean earnings profile. Balance sheet holds 28M net cash with no debt drag; the business fully self-funds growth. Dilution is modest: diluted share count crept from 21.5M to 22.9M (about 1.7% CAGR) with SBC at 3.1% of revenue and buybacks recovering only 21% of SBC - so per-share value is not being destroyed, but capital is not being aggressively returned either. Insider activity shows 5 sells for 6.3M and zero open-market buys in the last 12 months, flagged as unusual, though at a mature-earner with rising stock this is common and not per se a governance red flag.

Strengths 4
m78
Sustained margin expansion
Gross margin rose 580 bps (65.7% to 71.5%) and operating margin hit 27.2% in 2025, the best in the five-year window - evidence of pricing power and operating leverage in vascular niche devices.
m72
Cash conversion stepped up
FCF jumped to 74.5M in 2025 from 37.2M prior, with OCF/NI at 1.23x and accruals -2% of assets - reported earnings are backed by cash.
m65
Fortress-lite balance sheet
28.2M net cash, no debt, Altman Z 7.12 - zero survival risk and full self-funding of growth and small tuck-in M&A.
m55
Clean earnings-quality signals
Beneish M -2.61, negative accruals, and consistent NI-to-FCF alignment across years indicate no manipulation footprint.
Concerns 3
m32
Buybacks only offset ~21% of SBC
With SBC at 3.1% of revenue and repurchases recovering just 21.3%, share count drifts up ~1.7%/yr - a mild but persistent per-share headwind.
m22
Insider selling, no buying
5 sells totaling 6.3M and zero open-market buys in 12 months; flagged as unusual vs history. Not alarming in isolation for a mature earner but worth monitoring.
m18
2022 margin dip shows some cyclicality
Operating margin fell to 16.6% in 2022 before recovering - the business is not immune to input-cost or mix shocks.
This is a quietly excellent small-cap medical device business. Revenue is compounding double digits, margins are structurally expanding, cash conversion is now excellent, and the balance sheet has no financial risk. The forensic checks all come back clean. The blemishes are minor: SBC modestly exceeds buybacks so shares creep up, and insiders are trimming rather than adding. I read this as a Strong business - well into the healthy zone but not yet demonstrably in the robust-fortress tier given its size and the fact that its moat is inferred rather than visible in the data.
Verify before trusting this (5)
  • Customer/product concentration in vascular portfolio and geographic mix from 10-K
  • M&A contribution vs organic growth within the 13% revenue CAGR
  • Nature of the 5 insider sells (10b5-1 plans vs discretionary) and any Form 4 context
  • Sustainability of 71.5% gross margin - pricing vs mix vs FX
  • SBC grant structure and dilution trajectory going forward
Valuation / Mispricing
-69
Rich
edge √Σ 25 · risk √Σ 109 · conf 7/10
Price $82.38 vs signal-adj deserved ~$53 (quality-lifted maybe ~$60); price sits ~35-55% above deserved - clearly rich. attractive below $58.00

The composite fair value of $45.79 and signal-adjusted FV of $53.40 both sit well below the $82.38 price, implying roughly 35% downside on the base synthesis. The DCF alone at $56.97 is the most generous input and still leaves a ~30% gap; the EPV floor of $23.43 shows how little of today's price is supported by current earning power without heavy growth credit. The gap is real, not a rounding error. That said, LMAT is a genuinely strong business (quality 73) with clean earnings (quality 3), so the deserved value deserves a premium to the composite - call it something in the high $50s to mid $60s once you credit durable double-digit growth, expanding margins, and a debt-free balance sheet. Even on that generous read, $82 is a full price. The market is paying for 8+ years of mid-teens growth and 40%+ EBIT margins in a slow-growth device niche - a bar the bull case can clear but that leaves zero room for a stumble. This is a fine business at a rich price, not a mispricing to exploit.

Cheap signals 1
m25
Quality deserves a premium to composite
Clean earnings, no debt, expanding margins justify lifting deserved value above the $45.79 composite - but not to $82.
Rich / priced-in 4
m70
Price ~55% above signal-adjusted FV
$82.38 vs signal-adj FV $53.40 implies -35% upside; even the most generous DCF at $56.97 leaves a ~30% gap.
m60
EPV floor is a fraction of price
EPV of $23.43 is barely 28% of the share price - current earning power alone justifies almost none of today's quote; the rest is growth optionality.
m55
Priced for perfection
Bear frame notes the multiple embeds 8+ years of mid-teens growth and 40%+ EBIT margins - heroic in a GPO-pressured device market.
m20
Insider trimming, not adding
Insiders are net sellers and SBC exceeds buybacks - management is not signaling the stock is cheap.
Fully valued to rich. This is exactly the setup my job warns about - a genuinely strong business the market has already figured out. Every fair-value method says the price is 30-55% ahead of deserved value, and quality alone does not close that gap. I would need this in the high $50s before I felt paid for the risk that growth or margins normalize. Owning it here is a bet on continued flawless execution, not a valuation call.
Verify before trusting this (4)
  • Forward organic growth guidance vs the mid-teens embedded in price
  • Gross and EBIT margin trajectory - is 40%+ EBIT actually in reach or capped nearer 30%
  • M&A cadence and pricing - tuck-ins are core to the growth algorithm
  • Any GPO/hospital pricing pressure showing up in ASPs
General Sentiment
-39
Headwind
tail √Σ 39 · head √Σ 80 · conf 6/10

The macro backdrop is mildly constructive - VIX at 14.3, S&P near highs, risk-on regime - but LMAT's 0.52 beta means the tailwind lands soft. What actually dominates this tape is stock-specific: the Aug 5 Q2 revenue miss and weak Q3 guide punctured a moderate-intensity steady-compounder narrative that was priced for sustained mid-teens growth and 40%+ margins. Post-print coverage (analyst Q&A recap, value comparisons vs GEHC) reads as investors interrogating whether the premium narrative still holds, not defending it. Narrative durability is only moderate and cult coefficient is low, so there is no fanbase to absorb the disappointment - the story is carried by execution, and execution just slipped. Analyst tone is turning from cheerleading to scrutiny, which for a name trading well above DCF is a slow de-rating force rather than a crash catalyst. Net: modest persistent headwind, not a rout.

Tailwinds 2
m30
Low beta shields from tape swings
Beta 0.52 in a calm risk-on regime (VIX 14.3, S&P near highs) means broad market pressure barely transmits. If the tape stays constructive, downside from macro is limited even as stock-specific issues weigh.
m25
Positive multi-year momentum still intact
13.6% CAGR and +7.6pp over 3 years give the name a residual trend bid and a base of holders reluctant to capitulate on one soft quarter, cushioning the guide-down reaction.
Headwinds 4
m55
Fresh guide-down cracks the compounder story
The Aug 5 Q2 revenue miss and soft Q3 guide directly undercut the 'steady-compounder' narrative the price depends on. For a moderate-durability story with low cult support, a guide cut lingers as an overhang for a full quarter.
m40
Analyst tone shifting to scrutiny
Coverage has pivoted to 'top questions from the call' and value comparisons versus GEHC - the framing has moved from growth conviction to justification. That is a slow de-rating pressure on a premium-multiple name.
m35
Macro valuation ceiling for premium small-caps
10y at 4.63% and market PE 26.2 cap multiple expansion for names already priced for perfection. LMAT's narrative embeds pricing power and margin expansion that a higher-rate tape is quicker to discount.
m25
Healthcare med-device sector out of the leadership
Risk-on tapes tend to reward higher-beta AI and cyclical narratives, not slow-growth med-device compounders. LMAT gets little narrative oxygen in this regime.
Net headwind, but a mild one. The macro tape is friendly and beta is low, so this is not a name getting mauled - it is a name where a moderate-intensity compounder narrative just took a real hit from a guide cut, and there is no cult or momentum-story to paper over it. Analyst framing is turning interrogative, which for a premium-multiple med-device name is the classic setup for a slow multiple compression rather than a sharp break. I lean modestly negative on non-fundamental pressure over the next quarter.
Verify before trusting this (4)
  • Whether sell-side price targets are cut in the weeks following the Q2 miss
  • Q3 pre-announcement or channel checks on Artegraft trajectory
  • Any sector rotation into defensive med-device names that would revive the compounder bid
  • VIX break above 20 which would expose the premium multiple faster
The market-wide tape + this name's exposure to it (beta / sector / narrative durability). Context on the non-fundamental pressure — not a call on the business or the price. processId: detail-general-sentiment
AI Impact
+52
Low exposure — physical implants, modest back-office leverage
opp √Σ 119 · thr √Σ 0 · conf 7/10

The need — repairing and clearing diseased vessels in an aging population — is physical and growing, and the solution is a sterile implant or catheter in a surgeon's hand with FDA/CE clearance and product liability attached, none of which cheap software reproduces. AI reaches LeMaitre in three thin channels: (1) internal cost — regulatory writing, quality systems, tissue-processing documentation, and a direct sales force of specialist reps who can be made more productive per territory; (2) demand — AI-read CT/ultrasound and screening algorithms plausibly increase diagnosed PAD, carotid and aortic disease, which widens the procedure funnel LeMaitre sells into; (3) competition — AI lowers the cost of design and simulation but not of clinical evidence, cryopreserved tissue supply chains, sterile manufacturing, or 25 years of surgeon relationships in a market too small to attract a well-funded AI-native entrant. Net: mildly favorable, structurally minor. The company's margin expansion is a pricing-and-scale story, not an AI story, and should not be credited to AI.

AI opportunities 8
m70
Underlying Need Persistence
Vascular disease treatment in an aging population is demographically anchored and physical.
m50
Solution Persistence
The implant-and-catheter solution form is stable; competing shifts are clinical, not AI-driven.
m31
Responsibility Transfer
LeMaitre owns device liability and tissue-processing accountability that no hospital wants.
m26
Scarcity Migration
Scarcity sits in cleared portfolio breadth, tissue supply and specialist reps — all AI-resistant.
m38
Customer DIY Preference
No hospital will manufacture vascular implants in-house regardless of AI capability.
m13
AI Margin Conversion
Overhead savings plausibly stick because pricing is set clinically, not by cost pass-through.
m57
Revenue Unit Durability
The monetized unit is a physical consumable/implant per procedure — AI cannot dematerialize it.
m19
Entrant Compression
AI lowers design cost but not clinical evidence, clearance or distribution cost in a small market.
AI threats 0

None surfaced.

AI is not the axis this stock turns on — exposure is genuinely low, and that is the finding. Exposure 21 with position 57: physical implants, cleared portfolios and cryopreserved tissue sit outside AI's blast radius, and the honest AI contribution is a modest overhead-leverage tailwind on top of an already 27.2% operating margin plus a free volume kicker if AI imaging raises PAD/carotid detection rates. Do not credit the 65.7%→71.5% gross margin climb to AI — that is price and mix, and the one AI-adjacent danger is hospital procurement analytics making that premium harder to defend. Watch quarterly ASP commentary and SG&A as a share of revenue; underwrite this name on pricing power and tuck-in M&A, not on any AI narrative.
Verify before trusting this (8)
  • PAD/carotid procedure volume trends
  • aging-demographic surgical caseloads
  • dialysis access population growth
  • unit volume vs price contribution
  • procedure-driven reorder rates
  • mix shift toward lower-ASP items
  • open vs endovascular mix shifts
  • new PAD drug therapy data
The structural effect of the AI wave on this specific business over the next ~5 years — demand, cost leverage, moat, barriers to entry, position in the AI stack. The reality beneath the AI story, not the story's market pressure (General Sentiment owns that) — and not a call on the business today or the price.
Growth Outlook
+6
Growing
edge √Σ 107 · risk √Σ 100 · conf 8/10

The world is aging and vascular disease burden compounds with it; that demand is procedural, non-discretionary once symptomatic, and delivered through surgeons who value tool familiarity — a durable moat for a direct-sales niche supplier. The offsetting force is buyer consolidation: hospital systems and GPOs are professionalizing procurement precisely against low-visibility, high-margin disposables, and LMAT's growth formula leans on annual price increases. Higher-for-longer rates (10y 4.63) tighten hospital budgets and raise the bar for M&A math, while the sector's contraction phase is concentrated in capital equipment rather than implants and consumables — so LMAT is on the right side of the sector's split. Net: a business whose demand is close to weather-proof, whose pricing lever is finite, and whose realistic long-run trajectory is low-double-digit revenue with mid-teens earnings, not a mid-20s compounder.

Growth drivers 4
m69
Structural price-led revenue engine
LeMaitre's model is annual list-price increases across low-competition, low-cost-per-procedure disposables (embolectomy/thrombectomy catheters, patches, shunts) that hospitals rarely tender aggressively. This is why revenue has compounded 13.6% CAGR with unusually low volatility (0.0005) and all years positive — growth is manufactured, not cycle-dependent.
m58
Operating leverage on a fixed sales/manufacturing base
Operating income +40.8% on revenue +11.2% in the newest matched quarter, and a 38.5% earnings CAGR vs 13.6% revenue CAGR. Gross-margin gains (in-sourcing, allograft yield, mix toward biologics) plus a direct sales force already built out mean incremental revenue drops through at high margin. Earnings growth should keep outrunning revenue growth even if revenue merely holds.
m47
Demographic-anchored procedure demand
Peripheral vascular disease, aortic and carotid intervention volumes track an aging population and are largely non-deferrable once symptomatic. This insulates LMAT from the capex-driven weakness flagged in the sector's contraction read — LMAT sells consumables and implants, not capital equipment.
m32
Tuck-in M&A optionality
The historical playbook is buying small vascular product lines and repricing/reselling them through the existing direct rep network. With a clean balance sheet and high FCF conversion (59% FCF CAGR), this is a repeatable +2-4pt revenue adder that consensus models only partially embed.
Growth risks 5
m56
Quarterly trend already decelerating
Revenue confidence flags the quarterly trend as 'decelerating': newest matched-quarter revenue +11.2% vs multi-year 13.6% CAGR. Price increases face diminishing headroom after several aggressive years, and reps-per-territory additions have a saturation point. The base case drifts toward high-single/low-double digits, not re-acceleration.
m64
Small addressable market caps the ceiling
Vascular surgery consumables is a niche with a finite TAM; LMAT is already the primary supplier in several sub-segments. There is no plausible mechanism — no new modality, no reimbursement inflection — that lifts organic growth into the mid-20s for a decade, which is what the price-implied 26.9% requires.
m41
Hospital consolidation / GPO pricing pressure
The price-taking dynamic that has powered growth is exactly what consolidated purchasing organizations attack. Any shift from annual price increases to flat contracts removes several points of revenue growth and the associated margin expansion simultaneously.
m29
Estimate slippage on the most recent print
Newest print missed at 0.74 vs 0.81 est (-9%) after several beats — evidence that cost, FX, or tissue-processing (allograft) variability can break the smooth-beat pattern. Near-term prints are less reliably above the line than the 2025-2026 record implies.
m18
Sector demand phase in contraction
Medical Instruments & Supplies demand score -2 with capex and revenue indicators weakening; macro headwinds with 10y at 4.63 pressure hospital budgets. Less relevant to consumables than to equipment, but it caps upside surprise on volume.
vs expectations: ~6m inline · 1y inline · 2-3y below
The forward growth verdict — is the business itself likely to grow (next 2 quarters / year 1 / years 2–3), judged against its category and against printed expectations. The full horizon ladder + creme renders on the Growth Outlook card above. Not a call on the price (Valuation owns that) or the tape (Sentiment owns that).
Please log in to view trade setups
The Augustus trade-setup read is a members feature.
Log in
Lenses kept deliberately separate — Company Quality (price-agnostic), Valuation (price-conditional), General Sentiment (non-fundamental macro/narrative pressure), AI Impact (structural ~5yr AI exposure), and Growth Outlook (the forward growth verdict). The scores are not blended. Filing-level items (convertibles, lock-ups, customer concentration) are v2 — see each lens's "verify."
Price Prediction
Unavailable View weakness chain →

Prediction unavailable. valuation-synthesis has no result for LMAT — the prediction needs its fair-value anchors.

Community AI Feedback
No community reviews yet for LMAT. Be the first — hit How to Contribute, have any AI review this page, and paste its take back here.
My Notes personal — only you see this
v1.1.562 · 9b2927c4 · 2026-08-22 16:52:06