CRL vs FLGT

Charles River Laboratories Inte vs Fulgent Genetics, Inc. — Valuation Comparison 2026

CRL

Diagnostics & Research
Charles River Laboratories Inte
Quality
7.8
out of 10
Value Trap
13
SAFE
Price
$181.34
Last close
Models
12/13
Active
VS

FLGT

Diagnostics & Research
Fulgent Genetics, Inc.
Quality
7.1
out of 10
Value Trap
12
SAFE
Price
$18.24
Last close
Models
12/13
Active

Model-by-Model Comparison

ModelType CRL Fair ValueCRL Upside FLGT Fair ValueFLGT Upside
Bayesian DCF Intrinsic $116.83 -35.6% $62.09 +240.4%
Earnings Power Value Intrinsic $154.38 -14.9% $24.12 +32.2%
EROIC Spread Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
First Chicago Scenario $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
Markov DDM Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
ML-RIV Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
Dynamic NAV Asset-Based $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
PWERM Option-Based $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
Regime Cross-Sectional Relative $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
Sentiment SOTP Hybrid $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
CUCE Ensemble Ensemble $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
FTNN Topology Relative $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
RCMH-DCF Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
🔒

Unlock Full 13-Model Comparison

Access all valuation models for CRL vs FLGT — including EROIC Spread, First Chicago, Markov DDM, PWERM, and 7 more.

Access Full Analysis — From $27/mo →

CRL vs FLGT — Which Stock Is More Undervalued?

CRL scores higher with a 7.8/10 quality rating vs FLGT's 7.1/10. Both stocks are analyzed daily using SEC EDGAR filings across 13 independent models.

Comparing Charles River Laboratories Inte (CRL) and Fulgent Genetics, Inc. (FLGT) across 13 institutional-grade valuation models reveals how each company's intrinsic value stacks up against its market price. CirclFi's engine processes SEC EDGAR 10-K and 10-Q filings, FRED macroeconomic data, and GDELT news sentiment to generate independent fair value estimates daily.

CRL currently trades at $181.34 with a QOC of 7.8/10, while FLGT trades at $18.24 with a QOC of 7.1/10.

Both companies are analyzed with models spanning intrinsic (Bayesian DCF, EPV), scenario-based (First Chicago), regime-switching (Markov DDM, RCMH-DCF), machine learning (ML-RIV, FTNN Topology), and ensemble methods (CUCE).