MLAB vs SENS

Mesa Laboratories, Inc. vs Senseonics Holdings, Inc. — Valuation Comparison 2026

MLAB

Industrial Instruments For Measurement, Display, and Control
Mesa Laboratories, Inc.
Quality
8.6
out of 10
Value Trap
37
LOW
Price
$102.02
Last close
Models
12/13
Active
VS

SENS

Industrial Instruments For Measurement, Display, and Control
Senseonics Holdings, Inc.
Quality
6.8
out of 10
Value Trap
30
LOW
Price
$6.79
Last close
Models
11/13
Active

Model-by-Model Comparison

ModelType MLAB Fair ValueMLAB Upside SENS Fair ValueSENS Upside
Bayesian DCF Intrinsic $88.07 -13.7% $0.98 -85.5%
Earnings Power Value Intrinsic $528.65 +418.2% $1.21 -76.4%
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 MLAB vs SENS — including EROIC Spread, First Chicago, Markov DDM, PWERM, and 7 more.

Access Full Analysis — From $27/mo →

MLAB vs SENS — Which Stock Is More Undervalued?

MLAB scores higher with a 8.6/10 quality rating vs SENS's 6.8/10. Both stocks are analyzed daily using SEC EDGAR filings across 13 independent models.

Comparing Mesa Laboratories, Inc. (MLAB) and Senseonics Holdings, Inc. (SENS) 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.

MLAB currently trades at $102.02 with a QOC of 8.6/10, while SENS trades at $6.79 with a QOC of 6.8/10.

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).