ZBH — Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc.
Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc. engages in the design, manufacture, and marketing of orthopedic reconstructive products. The firm also offers sports medicine, biologics, extremities, and trauma products, spine, craniomaxillofacial, and thoracic products, office-based technologies, dental implants, and related surgical products.
Price chart & technical analysis
Loading chart…
As of 2026-09-13, ZBH trades at $93.49 with a ~$18.1B market cap, sitting 5.2% below its 20-day SMA and 1.9% below its 50-day but 2.2% above its 200-day, with RSI at 40.0. Q2 2026 net sales of $2.177B beat consensus (+4.8% reported / +4.0% organic) and management raised FY26 organic growth and EPS guidance and expanded the buyback to $1B, yet the stock has slipped ~4.5% over the past month.
The market is giving ZBH credit for the beat-and-raise but not much more. Q2 2026 (reported Aug 5, 2026) delivered $2.177B revenue vs ~$2.135B consensus and adjusted EPS of $2.07 vs $2.01 expected, and FY26 organic growth guidance was lifted to 2.25%-3.25% with adjusted EPS to $8.47-$8.59. But critics correctly flag that adjusted EPS was flat year-over-year ($2.07 vs $2.07) and adjusted net earnings fell 2.8% ($399.6M), with per-share figures flattered by share-count reduction. Persistent headwinds — ~100bps annual pricing erosion, China volume-based procurement, Japan supply constraints, and sluggish International Knees (down 1.5% cc vs a strong Stryker) — keep the tone cautious. As of 2026-09-13 the tape reflects that: RSI 40.04, -5.2% vs SMA20, -4.49% over 1 month, and a Wall Street consensus rating of Hold (17 buy / 22 hold / 3 sell).
Revenue has climbed steadily from $1.754B in Q3 2023 to $2.177B in Q2 2026, but the growth rate is uneven and now softening. Reported YoY growth ran roughly +4% through mid-2024, accelerated to +7.0% (Q2 2025), +9.7% (Q3 2025), +10.9% (Q4 2025) and +9.3% (Q1 2026), then decelerated to +4.8% in Q2 2026 — a clear recent slowdown, and management's full-year organic guide of just 2.25%-3.25% implies reported figures have been flattered by FX/acquisitions and that underlying organic growth is only low-single-digit. Margins show no structural trend: operating margin has oscillated in a 12.8%-19.2% band across the last 12 quarters and sits at 15.0% in Q2 2026, with TTM operating margin of 15.7% and net margin of 9.5%. GAAP EPS is noisy ($0.70 in Q4 2025 to $1.22 in Q1 2026) and the Q2 2026 GAAP figure of $1.03 lags adjusted EPS of $2.07, so 'earnings growth' is largely buyback-driven, not operating. Free cash flow is the bright spot: consistently positive every quarter, ranging ~$130M to ~$526M, with roughly $1.27B generated over the trailing four quarters (Q3 2025-Q2 2026). Bottom line: stable but slow-growing revenue, flat/range-bound margins, and reliable cash generation — an inflection story that keeps getting deferred, not a structural collapse.
Cheap on cash-flow metrics, unremarkable on GAAP. TTM P/E is 22.6x ($4.198 EPS), but that is distorted by heavy amortization/restructuring; on adjusted/forward numbers the stock trades at roughly 11.0x next-FY consensus EPS of $8.53 (as of 2026-09-13, $93.49 / $8.53). That is a deep discount to med-tech peers (Stryker, Boston Scientific often 25x+) and to ZBH's own 5-year average P/E of 50.7x — though that average is skewed by depressed-earnings years, so the more honest comparison is the 5-year average P/S of 3.2x versus today's 2.13x. The PEG ratio of 93.3 is essentially meaningless given sub-5% earnings growth. P/B of 1.42x is low, dividend yield of 1.06% is modest, and the balance sheet is reasonable (D/E 0.59, current ratio 1.69, LT debt down to $6.28B from $6.94B in Q4 2025). Verdict: cheap versus its own history and versus peers, but the discount is a rational reflection of low organic growth (~2-3%), mid-teens operating margins that aren't expanding, and a 5.5% ROIC barely above cost of capital — not a mispricing the market has simply overlooked.
The market is pricing skepticism, not optimism: ~11x forward EPS for a company that just beat and raised. That means there is optionality if organic growth merely stabilizes in the 3-4% range and margins hold — a re-rating to 13-14x forward EPS would imply meaningfully higher prices. But the flip side is a value-trap setup: if China VBP, ~100bps pricing erosion, and International Knee share losses keep organic growth below ~3%, the low multiple simply stays low and investors earn only the ~7% FCF yield and buyback. Watch cash conversion rather than headline EPS — the accruals ratio of -1.09% (as of 2026-06-30) is healthy, meaning operating cash flow exceeds net income, so the wide GAAP-to-adjusted EPS gap ($4.20 TTM GAAP vs $8.53 forward adjusted) reflects real non-cash amortization rather than a red flag on earnings quality. The key tension: buybacks are shrinking the share count and lifting EPS while the operating business grows slowly — fine as long as you don't pay too much, which at ~11x you aren't.
Range-bound with a fresh short-term pullback. As of 2026-09-13, RSI stood at 40.04 — weak but not yet oversold; price was -5.2% below the 20-day SMA and -1.93% below the 50-day, but still +2.24% above the 200-day. Returns: -4.67% over 1 week, -4.49% over 1 month, +5.55% over 3 months, +0.31% over 6 months. The setup is a stock that rallied earlier in the year, has given back short-term gains, and is now leaning on the 200-day as support. Entry-timing implication: this is not a knife-catch (RSI 40, not <30) and not a breakout — a patient buyer could wait for stabilization (RSI turning up, or a reclaim of the 20/50-day) rather than buying into a falling short-term trend, while a longer-horizon value buyer would focus on the ~$79-$107 52-week range and the ~2.2% cushion over the 200-day.
- Aging global demographics — the durable structural tailwind for joint replacement and orthopedic procedure volumes.
- Medical-device pricing pressure and China volume-based procurement (VBP), a persistent ~100bps annual revenue headwind that caps margin expansion.
- Interest rates / cost of capital — ~$6.3B of long-term debt means refinancing costs and valuation multiples are rate-sensitive, though a low beta (0.47) makes ZBH a defensive, rate-friendly holding.
- FX and international exposure — reported revenue growth (e.g. +9.3% in Q1 2026) far exceeds the low-single-digit organic guide, implying meaningful currency/acquisition distortion and geographic supply constraints (Japan).
- Elective-procedure volumes and healthcare-budget cycles — resilient but not immune to consumer or payer pressure; sector rotation in and out of defensive med-tech affects the multiple.
- Q3 2026 earnings expected Nov 4, 2026 (consensus EPS ~$1.88) — the key read on whether organic growth is stabilizing after the Q2 deceleration.
- Multi-year pipeline: 50+ new products over 36 months, with ROSA Shoulder robotic adoption and digital-ecosystem integrations as the watch items.
- Expanded $1B share buyback — a direct EPS and per-share FCF tailwind as long as the multiple stays low.
- Completion of the U.S./international go-to-market salesforce transition (tracked ahead of schedule) with minimal disruption.
- Any easing of China VBP or International Knee share losses, which would support a multiple re-rating.
- Structural pricing erosion (~100bps/year) plus China VBP that keeps international growth anemic and margins range-bound.
- Competitive share loss — notably International Knees down 1.5% cc while rivals like Stryker grow, signaling a competitive-position problem, not just a macro one.
- Low returns on capital — ROIC of 5.5% and ROE of 5.6% are barely above cost of capital, meaning reinvested dollars create limited value.
- Leverage and capital allocation — ~$5.9B net debt (~3x EBITDA) and a buyback-heavy return strategy that flatters EPS while the operating business grows slowly.
- Execution risk on the commercial restructuring and supply constraints (Japan), plus a wide GAAP-to-adjusted EPS gap ($4.20 vs $8.53) that can mask underlying softness if investors focus only on headline guidance.
ZBH is a cheap, cash-generative, defensive med-tech name with a growth problem, not a broken business. At ~11x forward EPS, a ~7% FCF yield (~$1.27B trailing FCF on an $18.1B market cap), a 1.06% dividend, a low beta, and a solid balance sheet (current ratio 1.69, D/E 0.59), the downside looks cushioned for a company whose demographic demand is intact. But organic growth is decelerating (guide 2.25%-3.25%), operating margins are stuck in the mid-teens, ROIC is only 5.5%, and management is defending International Knees against Stryker. This is 'value with a ceiling' — worth holding for income and optionality on a re-rating, but not a high-conviction buy until organic growth or margins show a genuine inflection. As of 2026-09-13 the risk/reward is mildly favorable but not compelling.
Blended forward-P/E and FCF-yield approach, run as of 2026-09-13. Primary: ~12.5x next-FY consensus EPS of $8.53 (a discount to slow-growth med-tech peers like Medtronic at ~17x, reflecting ZBH's 2-3% organic growth and mid-teens margins) implies $106.6. Cross-check: TTM FCF of ~$1.27B over ~193.5M shares gives ~$6.58 FCF/share; at a 6.2% required FCF yield that is ~$106. Both methods converge near $106, roughly 13% above the $93.49 price and modestly above the $103-104 consensus target.
Applying the deterministic mapping, a 'Fair Fundamentals' band (51.5) yields a Neutral lean regardless of valuation, and my independent read lands in the same place. If anything I would nudge the score up modestly, to roughly 55-58, on factors the pillars underweight: the financial health leg (77.0) is genuinely strong, trailing FCF of ~$1.27B equals a ~7% yield, and the negative accruals ratio (-1.09% as of 2026-06-30) signals high earnings quality (cash above net income). The low ROIC (5.5%) and sub-5% growth (46.9) are real and correctly keep it out of 'Good' territory, but the formula structurally excludes valuation — and at ~11x forward EPS and 2.13x sales versus a 3.2x five-year average, the stock is cheap versus its own history (valuation context 96.0). That is a net positive the 51.5 understates. Importantly, this is NOT the cyclical-trough trap the methodology warns about: orthopedics is a defensive, demographically driven sector, not a deep cyclical at a cyclical bottom, so the low score reflects a genuinely middling business rather than a temporarily depressed one about to snap back. Net: I'd rate it ~5 points higher (~56), which keeps the score inside the 'Fair Fundamentals' band, so I agree with the given band even as I mildly disagree with the exact number.
AI-generated analysis for informational purposes only, not financial advice.