CoreCivic vs Healthpeak Properties
CXW and DOC side by side, both in miscellaneous investing. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CXW and DOC compare
Healthpeak Properties is the larger company, worth 4.5 times as much as CoreCivic ($13.9B against $3.1B).
On earnings, CoreCivic is cheaper: it trades at 2.0× trailing earnings, against 57.5× for Healthpeak Properties.
CoreCivic grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (26.9% versus 5.5% for Healthpeak Properties).
Healthpeak Properties pays a dividend yielding 6.1%; CoreCivic does not pay one.
Healthpeak Properties scores higher on the StockData Score (8 against 7 for CoreCivic), 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 | CXW | DOC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $3.1B | $13.9B |
| Share price | $31.48 | $20.12 |
| Change, 1 year | 82.7% | 12.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 172% | −41.2% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.77 | 0.70 |
| Employees | 14K | 411 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 7 | 8 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Performance score | 0 | 0 |
| Health score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 2.0× (better) | 57.5× |
| P/S | 1.2× (better) | 4.7× |
| P/B | 1.4× (better) | 1.8× |
| EV/EBITDA | 1.5× (better) | 7.4× |
| PEG | 1.28 | – |
| FCF yield | −12.7% | – |
| Fair value | – | $16.81 |
| Margin of safety | – | −19.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 26.9% (better) | 5.5% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 3.0% | 11.4% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 47.5% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 1466% (better) | 45.8% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 19.1% (better) | −33.5% |
| Profitability | ||
| Net margin | – | 8.2% |
| FCF margin | −14.9% | – |
| Return on equity | – | 3.1% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.27 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.03 | – |
| Current ratio | 2.41 | – |
| Altman Z-score | 2.77 (better) | 0.82 |
| Piotroski F-score | – | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 6.1% |
| Payout ratio | – | 348% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 1 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | −3.8% |
| Buyback yield | 21.1% (better) | 0.73% |
| Shareholder yield | 21.1% (better) | 6.8% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 87.7% | 95.9% |
| Held by insiders | 2.2% | 0.34% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$18.0M | −$341K (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 13.1% | 3.3% |
Go deeper
- CXW stock overview
- CXW income statement
- CXW valuation and score
- DOC stock overview
- DOC income statement
- DOC valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.