CDNA vs GH: Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?
Last updated August 2026
Short answer
GH is the larger of the two ($21.74B market cap): the incumbent the market prices for continued execution (-367.58x forward earnings, beta 1.59). CDNA is the smaller challenger ($2.26B), priced similarly on forward earnings (33.94x): more room to run, but more to prove. The real question is which set of drivers you believe, and whether owning one (or both) leaves you over-concentrated.
CDNA vs GH: the tie-breaker metrics
Same yardstick, side by side (as of August 2026). Valuation lined up like this is most meaningful for two names in the same corner of the market, which these are. Figures are approximate; verify before investing.
| Metric | CDNA | GH | What it tells you |
|---|---|---|---|
| Market cap | $2.26B | $21.74B | Size. The larger name is the incumbent; the smaller has more room to grow and more to prove. |
| Forward P/E | 33.94 | -367.58 | Valuation on next year's expected earnings, the same yardstick for both. Lower is cheaper for that growth; higher means the market is paying up. |
| Beta | 2.43 | 1.59 | Volatility vs the market. Above 1 swings harder than the index; below 1 is steadier. Higher beta means bigger drawdowns to hold through. |
| Price vs 52-week range | 96% of range | 89% of range | Where today's price sits between the 52-week low and high. Near the high is momentum with less margin of safety; near the low is out of favor or a discount, depending on why. |
Before you buy: how CDNA and GH affect your concentration
The metrics above tell you which is the marginally better business. The bigger risk for most people is not picking the slightly worse stock, it is over-concentrating. CDNA and GH share themes, so owning both, or adding either to what you already hold, can quietly push a large share of your portfolio into one bet.
This is the part a generic comparison page cannot answer, because it depends on what you own. Connect your brokerage and Walnut shows your real, combined CDNA and GH exposure, flags overlap with your existing positions, and tells you if adding one would tip you past a concentration you are comfortable with, read-only by default, with your login staying at your broker. Walnut is not an investment adviser.
What does CareDx (CDNA) do?
CareDx builds and sells diagnostics, digital tools, and services for the organ-transplant community. Its core products are AlloSure, a next-generation-sequencing test that measures donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA) to detect kidney and heart transplant injury, and AlloMap, a long-established gene-expression test used by the large majority of U.S. heart-transplant centers. Around these tests the company layers patient-management software, pharmacy services, and a research-and-products franchise, positioning itself as an integrated transplant platform rather than a single-test lab.
What does Guardant Health (GH) do?
Guardant Health is a precision-oncology company that reads cancer signals from blood and tissue samples. Its business runs across three lines. Oncology, the largest, sells tests like Guardant360 (comprehensive genomic profiling that helps match patients to targeted therapies) and Guardant Reveal (a blood test for minimal residual disease, meaning traces of cancer left after treatment). Biopharma and Data sells testing, companion-diagnostic development, and real-world data to drugmakers. Screening is the newest and most-watched line: Shield is the first blood test to win full FDA approval as a primary screening option for colorectal cancer in average-risk adults 45 and older. In Q1 2026 the company reported ~$302 million in revenue, with oncology up 36% to ~$205 million on ~86,000 tests, biopharma and data at ~$53 million, and screening at ~$41.6 million on ~44,000 Shield tests (versus ~$5.7 million a year earlier).
CDNA vs GH: how do they differ?
Both fit overlapping themes, but they are not interchangeable. The useful comparison is which set of drivers and risks you want exposure to.
- CDNA drivers: Testing-volume growth; Return to profitability.
- GH drivers: Shield colorectal screening ramp; Core oncology growth and leverage.
Which fits which kind of investor
A faster-growing, richer-valued name usually swings harder, so it suits a longer horizon and a higher tolerance for volatility; a steadier, more cash-generative business suits a more conservative or income-minded investor. The honest test is which set of risks you could hold through a drawdown: Reimbursement is the central risk: bears flag potential headwinds of roughly $15 million to $30 million a year from possible coverage or coding changes, which would matter against a revenue base near $413 million. For GH, guardant is unprofitable and cash-consumptive, so it depends on the Shield launch converting into durable, reimbursed volume rather than one-off wins.
CDNA or GH: which should you pick?
Growth-minded investors who believe the theme has years to run tend to accept the richer multiple for more upside; value-minded investors lean toward the cheaper forward earnings and steadier profile. Pick CDNA if you believe its drivers more; GH if you believe its. Many investors hold both, but since they share themes, that is a concentrated bet, not diversification. Decide deliberately and check overlap. For the full detail, see the CDNA and GH guides.
CDNA vs GH: the full fundamentals
CDNA. CDNA trades at roughly 2.5 to 3 times trailing revenue, a multiple that reflects reaccelerating growth and an early return to profitability rather than deep value. A cash cushion near $200 million and positive adjusted EBITDA guidance give it flexibility, but the trailing net loss means the market is paying for future execution. Reimbursement outcomes are the swing factor for whether the current multiple proves justified.
GH. Figures are approximate and tied to the asOf date; verify live numbers before acting. GH trades on a high price-to-sales multiple typical of a fast-growing, pre-profit diagnostics company, so the valuation is driven by expected future growth rather than current earnings. The share price is volatile and moved sharply in mid-2026 on reimbursement news (including a July 2026 UnitedHealth coverage decision for Shield), which is why the timeline to 2027 cash-flow breakeven and the pace of Shield adoption matter more than any single quarter.
Headline figures (approximate, July 2026): CDNA shows revenue (ttm) ~$413M, q1 2026 revenue ~$118M (+39% YoY), 2026 revenue guidance ~$447M to $465M, 2026 adj. ebitda guidance ~$43M to $57M; GH shows revenue (q1 2026 quarterly) ~$302 million, up 48% year over year, 2026 revenue guidance (full year) ~$1.30 to $1.32 billion (~32 to 34% growth), adjusted ebitda (q1 2026) ~-$59 million loss (still unprofitable), cash and equivalents ~$1.2 billion at quarter end.
The bottom line: CDNA vs GH
CDNA and GH are related but distinct: same themes, different businesses and risks. Neither wins in the abstract; the right pick is whichever thesis you actually believe, sized so you are not over-concentrated in one theme. Walnut can show your combined CDNA and GH exposure against your real portfolio. It is not an investment adviser.
Wondering how CDNA or GH fits the portfolio you already own? Walnut is an AI investing app that connects your brokerage read-only and answers questions like that about your actual holdings: overlap, concentration, and how each position tracks the S&P 500. Compare the best AI portfolio analyzers or see the best AI investing apps in 2026.
Investing in CareDx with AI
Connect the broker you already use and ask Walnut's AI how CDNA fits what you actually hold: whether you own it already through a fund, what it would do to your concentration, and how it has tracked the S&P 500. Read-only by default, and you approve anything before it reaches your broker.
FAQ
What is the difference between CDNA and GH?
+
CareDx builds and sells diagnostics, digital tools, and services for the organ-transplant community. Guardant Health is a precision-oncology company that reads cancer signals from blood and tissue samples. They show up together because they share investment themes, but they are different businesses, so the better fit depends on which thesis you are expressing.
Is CDNA or GH the better stock?
+
Neither is universally better. GH is the larger incumbent; CDNA is the smaller challenger and looks pricier on forward earnings. Walnut is informational, not investment advice. Compare what each does, the tie-breaker metrics above, and the risks, then decide which fits your thesis and what you already own.
Which is cheaper, CDNA or GH?
+
On forward P/E (as of August 2026), CDNA trades at 33.94x and GH at -367.58x, so GH is the cheaper of the two on next year's expected earnings. A lower multiple is not automatically the better buy: a richer valuation can be justified by faster growth, and a lower one can reflect real risk. Weigh the multiple against how fast each business is compounding.
Should you own both CDNA and GH?
+
Because they share themes, owning both concentrates you in that theme. That can be intentional (a focused bet) or accidental (less diversification than it looks). Walnut can show your combined exposure across both, and whether adding either over-concentrates you, before you buy.
What are the risks of CDNA vs GH?
+
CDNA: Reimbursement is the central risk: bears flag potential headwinds of roughly $15 million to $30 million a year from possible coverage or coding changes, which would matter against a revenue base near $413 million. The business is concentrated in the AlloSure and HeartCare franchises, so pricing pressure or a coverage decision there disproportionately affects results. Competition is intensifying, notably from Natera's Prospera test plus Eurofins Transplant Genomics, Devyser, and others, and the rivalry has spilled into litigation. The company remains unprofitable on a trailing-twelve-month basis despite the recent quarterly profit, so the turnaround is early. Integration risk from the Naveris acquisition and execution risk on the Lab Products divestiture add further uncertainty. GH: Guardant is unprofitable and cash-consumptive, so it depends on the Shield launch converting into durable, reimbursed volume rather than one-off wins. Reimbursement is the central swing factor: coverage decisions, guideline inclusion, and per-test pricing (the $1,495 Medicare rate, private payer terms) can move sharply and are outside the company's control. Competition is intense from Exact Sciences (Cologuard in colorectal screening), Natera (minimal residual disease), and Roche's Foundation Medicine (genomic profiling), which pressures pricing and share. Shield's clinical sensitivity, roughly 84% overall but lower for early-stage and precancerous lesions, invites scrutiny versus colonoscopy. The stock also trades at a high price-to-sales multiple, so any slip in growth or the breakeven timeline can trigger large swings.
Walnut is informational, not investment advice. This page is descriptive and not a recommendation to buy or sell CDNA or GH; figures are approximate and dated (as of August 2026). Verify current data before investing.