Nano X Imaging Ltd's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Nano X Imaging Ltd (NNOX) against its publicly traded competitors: sales growth, net income, profitability, valuation and market share, plus each peer's market capitalization, revenue, income and employees. Free below: the top 5 peers. Subscriber access adds the full competitor list and CSV downloads.
Key Findings: Nano X Imaging Ltd vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 13M vs 91,844M combined for tracked competitors (0.0% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+300.0% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs accelerating (+67.4%) for its tracked peer group.
- Profitability: Its -576.1% net margin compares with 11.3% for the peer group.
- Scale: Nano X Imaging Ltd ranks #33 of 47 companies by market capitalization in the Medical Laboratories industry, holding 0.0% of industry market cap.
- Peer revenue share: Nano X Imaging Ltd accounted for 0.0% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group.
- Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $0.04M compares with $0.49M for the peer group (0.1x).
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
NNOX Sales vs. its Competitors, Q4 2025
With a net margin of -576.13 %, Nano X Imaging Ltd reported lower profitability than its competitors (11.25 %).
Nano X Imaging Ltd generated 0.03 % of the combined sales of its peer group.
Nano X Imaging Ltd vs. its Competitors, Q4 2025
Net margin
Revenue run-rate vs trailing 12 months
TTM net margin
TTM = trailing twelve months. Run-rate annualizes the latest quarter (×4) and compares it to TTM. In millions of $. High-Confidence Competitors are named as a competitor directly in an SEC filing; Similar-Size Competitors are the closest peers by market-cap rank within the same industry; Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors are the closest peers by combined revenue growth, operating margin and ROIC, all independent of the competitor list.
TTM revenue, latest-quarter run-rate and net income/margin benchmarked across Nano X Imaging Ltd and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| Nano X Imaging Ltd | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar-Size Competitors (10) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across Nano X Imaging Ltd's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
Nano X Imaging Ltd's Competitor Quality Breadth
Share of each group, trailing 12 months: profitable (net margin > 0), expanding (revenue growth > 0), growing faster than the industry's own median, and financially distressed (Piotroski F-Score of 2 or below).
| Entity | Profitable | Expanding | Above Industry Growth | Distressed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nano X Imaging Ltd | - | Yes | Yes | No |
| Competitors combined (8) | ||||
| Similar-Size Competitors (10) |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Altman Z-Score is not shown here: it is not populated in the underlying data for any company. Percentages are of companies in each group that report the relevant metric, not of the full group size.
NNOX Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
NNOX Stock Performance relative to Similar-Size Competitors
5 Best-Performing Tracked Competitors, Trailing 12 Months
| # | Competitor | TTM Share Price Return | vs U.S.A. 500 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Butterfly Network Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 2 | Check Cap Ltd | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 3 | Hologic Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 4 | General Electric Company | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 5 | Koninklijke Philips Nv | 282.9% | Outperformed |
TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Nano X Imaging Ltd's best-performing tracked competitors requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.
Nano X Imaging Ltd's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers
Publicly Traded Peers of Nano X Imaging Ltd
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
| Nano X Imaging Ltd | 40.95 | 13.02 |
| General Electric Company | 333,197.28 | 50,638.00 |
| Ge Healthcare Technologies Inc | 30,518.46 | 17,475.00 |
| Koninklijke Philips Nv | 24,168.46 | 19,974.08 |
| Hologic Inc | 17,087.75 | 3,644.80 |
| Butterfly Network Inc | 2,398.22 | 112.36 |
| SUBTOTAL | 407,427.16 | 91,857.51 |
Sign in to see all competitors of Nano X Imaging Ltd.
Sources: Nano X Imaging Ltd's official press releases and regulatory filings; CSIMarket.com's market research; and the financial filings and press releases of the other companies cited.
Updated on:
Focus of this report: publicly traded companies. Ten additional tables on Nano X Imaging Ltd versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
Nano X Imaging Ltd's Competitors Named by the Company
Competitive relationships identified from SEC filings and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.| Competitor | Basis | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Envision Physician Services | Named by the company | 85% |
| Nanox Health IT | Named by the company | 85% |
| Radiology Partners | Named by the company | 85% |
Filing basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Nano X Imaging Ltd's named competitors require a Commercial License.
Methodology: relationships are extracted from SEC filings (named-competitor disclosures) and corroborating sources. Named by the company = explicitly disclosed as a competitor; Inferred = derived from corroborating signals. Confidence reflects evidence strength.
Nano X Imaging Ltd's Business Segment Mix vs Peers
Revenue by operating segment or division, as named and reported by each company. Segment names are the filer's own and are not standardized across companies. Do not assume a same-named or similarly-named segment is defined identically between two companies. Shares are of each company's own total revenue and are not required to sum to 100% (intersegment revenue, unallocated items).| Company | Largest Segment |
|---|---|
| Nano X Imaging Ltd | Radiology Services 88.97 % |
| General Electric Company | Commercial Engines and Services, Reportable 72.90 % |
| Ge Healthcare Technologies Inc | Radiology Subsegment 53.17 % |
| Hologic Inc | Diagnostics 51.18 % |
Source: operating segment revenue as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API, leaf-level reportable segments only (parent roll-up segments are excluded where sub-segments are separately disclosed).
Nano X Imaging Ltd's Productivity vs Peers Comparison
Revenue and income per employee, trailing 12 months, in $; market cap in millions of $| Company | Market Cap | Revenue / Employee | Income / Employee |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nano X Imaging Ltd | 41 | 43,842 | -252,586 |
| General Electric Company | 333,197 | 888,386 | 157,579 |
| Ge Healthcare Technologies Inc | 30,518 | 323,611 | 36,611 |
| Koninklijke Philips Nv | 24,168 | 291,938 | 14,684 |
| Hologic Inc | 17,088 | 515,530 | 76,917 |
| Butterfly Network Inc | 2,398 | 510,727 | -340,227 |
| PEERS TOTAL | 407,386 | 491,757 | 66,538 |
Nano X Imaging Ltd's Geographic Revenue Exposure vs Peers
Revenue by country/region as reported in each company's most recent filing. Disclosure granularity varies by filer (some report by country, others by broad region) and is shown as disclosed.| Company | Largest Market |
|---|---|
| Hologic Inc | Non-US 30.23 % |
| Butterfly Network Inc | United States 81.27 % |
Source: revenue geography as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API. Percentages are of that company's own total consolidated revenue for its most recent reported period.
Nano X Imaging Ltd's Position in Industry Market Structure
Market-capitalization share and concentration across all 42 companies in Nano X Imaging Ltd's industry classification, broader than the peer set above. Market cap in millions of $.Nano X Imaging Ltd ranks #33 of 42 companies by market capitalization in its industry, holding 0.01 % of total industry market cap. The industry's Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) is 860, indicating a unconcentrated market structure (U.S. antitrust guidance: below 1,500 unconcentrated, 1,500 to 2,500 moderately concentrated, above 2,500 highly concentrated).
| Rank | Company | Market Cap | Industry Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Natera Inc | 58,913 | 16.93 % |
| 2 | Iqvia Holdings Inc | 45,638 | 13.12 % |
| 3 | Ge Healthcare Technologies Inc | 30,422 | 8.74 % |
| 4 | Quest Diagnostics Inc | 26,362 | 7.58 % |
| 5 | Incyte Corporation | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 6 | Labcorp Holdings Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 7 | Guardant Health Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 8 | Koninklijke Philips Nv | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 9 | Medpace Holdings Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 10 | Charles River Laboratories International inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 33 | Nano X Imaging Ltd | 42 | 0.01 % |
Market cap and industry share for the rest of Nano X Imaging Ltd's industry peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation) across CSIMarket's industry classification, market capitalization as of 2026-09-28.
Nano X Imaging Ltd's Same-Size Peers & Stock Performance
Peers chosen by closeness in market-cap rank within the same industry classification (not the named-competitor list above). Trailing 12-month total return, 3-month price momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio vs the broad U.S. market.| Rank | Company | Market Cap | TTM Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| 28 | Nrc Health | 423 | 38.77 % |
| 29 | Biodesix Inc | 297 | 260.02 % |
| 30 | Exagen Inc | 207 | -19.02 % |
| 31 | Maxcyte inc | 123 | -24.58 % |
| 32 | Sera Prognostics Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 33 | Nano X Imaging Ltd | 42 | -82.86 % |
| 34 | Onemednet Corporation | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 35 | Mdxhealth Sa | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 36 | American Shared Hospital Services | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 37 | Aclarion Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 38 | Bionexus Gene Lab Corp | 1,234 | 12.3% |
Market cap, return, momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio for the rest of Nano X Imaging Ltd's same-size peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation); returns and risk metrics as of 2026-09-28. Beta and Sharpe ratio are versus the broad U.S. equity market, not this industry.
Nano X Imaging Ltd's Profitability & Cost Structure
Trailing 12-month margins from SEC-filed financials. Operating margin is compared to the Medical Laboratories industry median; gross margin, EBITDA margin and capital intensity are compared to the live industry average (58 companies).| Metric | Company | Industry | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | -98.21 % | 43.57 % (avg) | -141.8 pp |
| Operating Margin | - | industry median | - |
| EBITDA Margin | - | -4.90 % (avg) | - |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | 32.31 % | 9.54 % (avg) | +22.8 pp |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. SG&A and R&D as a share of revenue have limited coverage as this data is backfilled and appear only where reported. Higher capital intensity is not inherently negative; it reflects the industry's asset requirements.
Nano X Imaging Ltd's Valuation vs Competitive Position
Valuation multiples vs the Medical Laboratories industry average (58 companies, excluding loss-making/negative-equity outliers), alongside returns on capital for context on whether a premium or discount lines up with measurably stronger or weaker returns.| Metric | Company | Industry Average | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| P/E | - | 37.0x | - |
| EV / EBITDA | - | 18.0x | - |
| P/B | 1.7x | 2.9x | -1.2x |
| Return on Equity | -53.69 % | industry aggregate | -60.67 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | -25.78 % | -4.04 % (avg) | -21.74 % |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. A valuation premium or discount is not, by itself, a judgment of over- or under-valuation. Compare it against the return and growth context shown elsewhere on this page.
Nano X Imaging Ltd's Multi-Year Financial Trajectory
Fiscal-year revenue growth, operating margin, return on invested capital and P/E, as reported in SEC filings.| Metric | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | 15.47 % | 13.91 % | 15.40 % |
| Operating Margin | - | - | - |
| Return on Invested Capital | -14.94 % | -14.14 % | -25.78 % |
| P/E | - | - | - |
Source: CSIMarket API, fiscal-year figures. P/E is this company's own historical ratio at each fiscal year end and can swing sharply around an earnings trough: that is real, not a data error.
Nano X Imaging Ltd's BCG Growth-Share Matrix
Relative market share (vs Nano X Imaging Ltd's largest competitor by market cap) against industry revenue growth, using the standard textbook thresholds (1.0x share, 10% growth) a common framework, not a precision instrument.
Nano X Imaging Ltd falls in the Dog quadrant: relative market share of 0.00x vs its largest competitor, in an industry growing revenue 5.8% (median, trailing 12 months).
Source: CSIMarket API (market-cap share and industry revenue growth). The 10% growth and 1.0x share lines are standard textbook thresholds, not derived from this industry's own distribution.
Nano X Imaging Ltd's Competitive Forces (Porter's Five Forces)
Only the forces this data can support honestly are shown; the other three are marked as such rather than guessed.| Force | Assessment | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Competitive Rivalry | High | Industry HHI of 860 (see Industry Market Structure & Concentration above) |
| Barriers to Entry | High (capital intensive) | Capital intensity (capex / revenue) of 32.31 % vs industry average 9.54 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above) |
| Supplier Power | Not covered on this page | See Nano X Imaging Ltd's dedicated suppliers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Buyer Power | Not covered on this page | See Nano X Imaging Ltd's dedicated customers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Threat of Substitutes | - | No systematic data source for cross-product substitution exists in this system; not estimated |
Note: this is a partial, data-grounded application of the framework, not a complete strategic assessment. Rivalry and barriers-to-entry readings are mechanical translations of the HHI and capital-intensity figures shown elsewhere on this page, not independent judgments.
Nano X Imaging Ltd's Industry Attractiveness & Competitive Strength
A CSIMarket composite, not a standard field: each axis is an equal-weighted average of three factors already shown elsewhere on this page (industry growth, industry profitability and rivalry for attractiveness; relative market share, profitability and growth vs industry for strength). Disclosed as a designed methodology, not a precision measurement.
Nano X Imaging Ltd falls in the Low attractiveness / Low strength cell: Harvest / Divest.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Each axis score is a simple 1(low)/2(medium)/3(high) average across its three inputs -- a transparent, disclosed simplification, not a validated academic scoring model.
Nano X Imaging Ltd's SWOT
Every point below is a fixed rule applied to a metric already shown elsewhere on this page (Market Structure, Profitability, Valuation, Run-Rate, Stock Performance, Quality Breadth) not an independent strategic assessment. A blank quadrant means no rule was met, not that none apply.Strengths
- Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+300.0% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
Weaknesses
- Return on equity 60.7 points below the industry aggregate.
- Underperforming the U.S.A. 500 over the trailing 12 months.
- Low relative market share vs the industry leader (0.00x).
Opportunities
- A meaningful share of tracked competitors (37.50 %) show financial-distress signals, a possible opening to gain share.
Threats
- High capital intensity requires continuous reinvestment just to keep pace with the industry.
Methodology: mechanical, rule-based SWOT. Each bullet reuses a figure already sourced and cited elsewhere on this page; nothing here is generated narrative or independent analyst judgment.
Nano X Imaging Ltd's Financial Strength vs Peers Comparison
Quick ratio, working capital, debt to equity and asset turnover, trailing 12 months| Company | Quick Ratio | Working Capital | Debt / Equity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nano X Imaging Ltd | 2.91 | 3.96 | 0.02 |
| General Electric Company | - | 0.86 | 1.09 |
| Ge Healthcare Technologies Inc | - | 1.23 | 1.00 |
| Koninklijke Philips Nv | 0.37 | 1.30 | 0.64 |
| Hologic Inc | 1.88 | 3.64 | 0.51 |
| Butterfly Network Inc | 2.39 | 4.14 | - |
Quick ratio = cash / current liabilities; working capital ratio = current assets / current liabilities; asset turnover = revenue / total assets. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Nano X Imaging Ltd's Revenue and Income Growth vs Peers
Quarterly revenue and net income growth, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Revenue Y/Y | Income Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nano X Imaging Ltd | Q4 2025 | +15.4 % | - |
| General Electric Company | Q2 2026 | +21.1 % | +16.6 % |
| Ge Healthcare Technologies Inc | Q1 2026 | +7.2 % | -30.1 % |
| Koninklijke Philips Nv | Q4 2025 | -1.0 % | - |
| Hologic Inc | Q4 2025 | +44.8 % | -10.9 % |
| Butterfly Network Inc | Q2 2026 | +42.5 % | - |
| PEERS TOTAL | +7.5 % | +99.8 % |
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Nano X Imaging Ltd's Peers' Costs of Sales and Capital Expenditures
Context for revenue growth: peer costs and capex, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Costs Y/Y | Capex Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nano X Imaging Ltd | Q4 2025 | +17.9 % | +52.0 % |
| General Electric Company | Q2 2026 | +540.9 % | +2.4 % |
| Ge Healthcare Technologies Inc | Q1 2026 | +16.3 % | +17.1 % |
| Koninklijke Philips Nv | Q4 2025 | -4.6 % | -15.1 % |
| Hologic Inc | Q4 2025 | -18.1 % | -54.3 % |
| Butterfly Network Inc | Q2 2026 | +16.5 % | +8.7 % |
Nano X Imaging Ltd's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nano X Imaging Ltd | - | - | - |
| General Electric Company | 6.98% | 11.25% | 48.50% |
| Ge Healthcare Technologies Inc | 5.43% | 7.29% | 19.37% |
| Koninklijke Philips Nv | 3.33% | 3.91% | 8.16% |
| Hologic Inc | 6.12% | 7.26% | 11.01% |
| Butterfly Network Inc | - | - | - |
ROA = net income / total assets; ROI = net income / investments; ROE = net income / equity; turnover ratios use trailing 12 month revenue (receivables) and cost of sales (inventory).
Nano X Imaging Ltd's Valuation vs Peers
P/E, price to sales, PEG, price to cash flow and price to book| Company | P/E | Price / Sales |
|---|---|---|
| Nano X Imaging Ltd | - | 3.15 |
| General Electric Company | 37.57 | 6.58 |
| Ge Healthcare Technologies Inc | 16.01 | 1.75 |
| Koninklijke Philips Nv | 27.00 | 1.21 |
| Hologic Inc | 31.65 | 4.69 |
| Butterfly Network Inc | - | 21.34 |
| PEERS AVERAGE | 32.98 | 4.44 |
P/E = price / diluted EPS (trailing 12 months); PEG = P/E divided by EPS growth; the average row divides the peers' combined market cap by their combined income, sales, cash flow and equity.