Canadian Pacific Kansas City vs Union Pacific
CP and UNP side by side, both in industrials. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CP and UNP compare
Union Pacific grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (4.2% versus 3.6% for Canadian Pacific Kansas City).
Union Pacific keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 28.8% compared with 25.0% at Canadian Pacific Kansas City.
Union Pacific pays a dividend yielding 1.8%; Canadian Pacific Kansas City does not pay one.
Union Pacific scores higher on the StockData Score (14 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 | UNP |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | – | $181B |
| Share price | $89.68 | $304.00 |
| Change, 1 year | 22.6% | 40.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 16.9% | 27.3% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.63 | 0.66 |
| Employees | 12K | 32K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 6 | 14 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Health score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 24.6× |
| P/S | – | 7.1× |
| P/B | – | 8.7× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 20.6× |
| P/FCF | – | 27.8× |
| PEG | – | 10.99 |
| FCF yield | – | 3.6% |
| Fair value | – | $231.58 |
| Margin of safety | – | −31.3% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 3.6% | 4.2% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 14.4% (better) | 4.6% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −7.5% | 5.7% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −4.2% | 7.3% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 4.7% | 8.7% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 36.8% | 40.0% (better) |
| Net margin | 25.0% | 28.8% (better) |
| FCF margin | 15.7% | 25.6% (better) |
| Return on equity | 8.3% | 39.7% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 6.1% | 16.1% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.54 (better) | 1.47 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.20 | 2.82 (better) |
| Interest coverage | – | 7.9× |
| Current ratio | 0.59 | 0.99 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | – | 4.38 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 8 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 1.8% |
| Payout ratio | 21.1% | 44.7% |
| Years of dividend growth | 1 | 16 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 4.2% | 7.0% (better) |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.01% |
| Shareholder yield | – | 1.8% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 70.4% | 89.2% |
| Held by insiders | 0.00% | 0.13% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | −$9.3M |
| Superinvestors holding | 4 | 8 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 4.7% |
Go deeper
- CP stock overview
- CP income statement
- CP valuation and score
- UNP stock overview
- UNP income statement
- UNP valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.