Cardinal Health vs Cencora
CAH and COR side by side, both in wholesale trade-non-durable goods. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CAH and COR compare
Cardinal Health and Cencora are about the same size, with market caps of $58.3B and $63.1B.
On earnings, Cencora is cheaper: it trades at 24.6× trailing earnings, against 34.6× for Cardinal Health.
Cardinal Health grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (14.2% versus 5.1% for Cencora).
Cencora keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 0.79% compared with 0.67% at Cardinal Health.
Both pay dividends: Cardinal Health yields 0.82% and Cencora 0.73%.
Cardinal Health scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 15 for Cencora), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | CAH | COR |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $58.3B | $63.1B |
| Share price | $250.48 | $330.84 |
| Change, 1 year | 52.3% | −0.70% |
| Change, 5 years | 406% | 159% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.47 | 0.33 |
| Employees | 64K | 51K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 (better) | 15 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 1 |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Performance score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 4 | 4 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 34.6× | 24.6× (better) |
| P/S | 0.2× | 0.2× (better) |
| P/B | – | 20.7× |
| EV/EBITDA | 17.5× (better) | 17.7× |
| P/FCF | 12.9× (better) | 15.5× |
| PEG | 0.44 | – |
| FCF yield | 7.8% (better) | 6.4% |
| Fair value | $196.59 | $287.88 |
| Margin of safety | −27.4% | −14.9% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 14.2% (better) | 5.1% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.4% | 11.1% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 9.8% | 38.3% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 12.1% | 38.6% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 28.3% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 3.8% | 4.0% (better) |
| Operating margin | 1.0% (better) | 0.91% |
| Net margin | 0.67% | 0.79% (better) |
| FCF margin | 1.8% (better) | 1.2% |
| Return on equity | – | 104% |
| Return on invested capital | 136% (better) | 22.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 3.84 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.13 (better) | 2.18 |
| Interest coverage | 7.5× | – |
| Current ratio | 0.88 | 0.93 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 5.11 (better) | 4.66 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.82% (better) | 0.73% |
| Payout ratio | 28.6% | 17.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | 17 (better) | 16 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 1.0% | 5.8% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 2.3% (better) | 1.6% |
| Shareholder yield | 3.2% (better) | 2.3% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 88.7% | 96.1% |
| Held by insiders | 0.28% | 5.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$61.6M | −$12.4M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.2% | 2.2% |
Go deeper
- CAH stock overview
- CAH income statement
- CAH valuation and score
- COR stock overview
- COR income statement
- COR valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.