Canadian Pacific Kansas City vs Norfolk Southern
CP and NSC side by side, both in industrials. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CP and NSC compare
Canadian Pacific Kansas City grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (3.6% versus 3.0% for Norfolk Southern).
Canadian Pacific Kansas City keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 25.0% compared with 21.0% at Norfolk Southern.
Norfolk Southern pays a dividend yielding 1.6%; Canadian Pacific Kansas City does not pay one.
Norfolk Southern scores higher on the StockData Score (11 against 6 for Canadian Pacific Kansas City), 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 | CP | NSC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | – | $77.0B |
| Share price | $89.68 | $342.64 |
| Change, 1 year | 22.6% | 22.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 16.9% | 20.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.63 | 0.77 |
| Employees | 12K | 19K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 6 | 11 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 2 | 2 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 29.3× |
| P/S | – | 6.1× |
| P/B | – | 4.7× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 17.0× |
| P/FCF | – | 47.2× |
| FCF yield | – | 2.1% |
| Fair value | – | $245.23 |
| Margin of safety | – | −39.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 3.6% (better) | 3.0% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 14.4% (better) | 4.5% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −7.5% (better) | −21.3% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −4.2% (better) | −20.9% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 4.7% | 10.2% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 36.8% (better) | 32.2% |
| Net margin | 25.0% (better) | 21.0% |
| FCF margin | 15.7% (better) | 13.0% |
| Return on equity | 8.3% | 17.0% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 6.1% | 10.1% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.54 (better) | 1.02 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.20 | 2.85 (better) |
| Interest coverage | – | 5.1× |
| Current ratio | 0.59 | 0.83 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | – | 2.59 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 1.6% |
| Payout ratio | 21.1% | 46.0% |
| Years of dividend growth | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 4.2% | 7.5% (better) |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.11% |
| Shareholder yield | – | 1.7% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 70.4% | 76.1% |
| Held by insiders | 0.00% | 0.05% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | $274K |
| Superinvestors holding | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 3.2% |
Go deeper
- CP stock overview
- CP income statement
- CP valuation and score
- NSC stock overview
- NSC income statement
- NSC valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.