Encompass Health vs Universal Health Services
EHC and UHS side by side, both in health services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How EHC and UHS compare
Encompass Health is the larger company, worth 1.3 times as much as Universal Health Services ($13.0B against $10.4B).
On earnings, Universal Health Services is cheaper: it trades at 7.2× trailing earnings, against 21.4× for Encompass Health.
Universal Health Services grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (10.0% versus 9.5% for Encompass Health).
Encompass Health keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 10.0% compared with 8.4% at Universal Health Services.
Both pay dividends: Encompass Health yields 0.59% and Universal Health Services 0.45%.
Universal Health Services scores higher on the StockData Score (22 against 17 for Encompass Health), 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 | EHC | UHS |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $13.0B | $10.4B |
| Share price | $131.49 | $176.05 |
| Change, 1 year | 4.1% | −21.9% |
| Change, 5 years | 102% | 35.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.70 | 0.79 |
| Employees | 42K | 102K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 17 | 22 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Performance score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Health score | 3 | 3 |
| Dividend score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 21.4× | 7.2× (better) |
| P/S | 2.1× | 0.6× (better) |
| P/B | 5.0× | 1.4× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 10.9× | 5.6× (better) |
| P/FCF | 31.4× | 12.3× (better) |
| PEG | 0.79 | 0.20 (better) |
| FCF yield | 3.2% | 8.1% (better) |
| Fair value | $123.38 | $340.27 |
| Margin of safety | −6.6% | 48.3% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 9.5% | 10.0% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 10.7% (better) | 8.5% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 18.8% | 21.0% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 20.2% | 29.3% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 14.2% | 16.0% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | – | 11.4% |
| Net margin | 10.0% (better) | 8.4% |
| FCF margin | 6.7% (better) | 4.7% |
| Return on equity | 25.5% (better) | 21.0% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 13.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.01 | 0.65 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.68 (better) | 1.75 |
| Interest coverage | – | 13.1× |
| Current ratio | 1.19 (better) | 1.12 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.81 (better) | 2.34 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.59% (better) | 0.45% |
| Payout ratio | 12.1% | 3.2% |
| Years of dividend growth | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | −8.5% | – |
| Buyback yield | 1.9% | 10.2% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 2.5% | 10.6% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 97.0% | 96.4% |
| Held by insiders | 1.0% | 17.1% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$47.8M | −$980K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.6% | 5.2% |
Go deeper
- EHC stock overview
- EHC income statement
- EHC valuation and score
- UHS stock overview
- UHS income statement
- UHS valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.