Ensign vs PACS
ENSG and PACS side by side, both in health services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ENSG and PACS compare
Ensign is the larger company, worth 1.4 times as much as PACS ($10.9B against $7.6B).
On earnings, PACS is cheaper: it trades at 27.3× trailing earnings, against 29.2× for Ensign.
Ensign grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (18.9% versus 15.2% for PACS).
Ensign keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 6.9% compared with 4.8% at PACS.
Ensign pays a dividend yielding 0.14%; PACS does not pay one.
Ensign scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 12 for PACS), 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 | ENSG | PACS |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $10.9B | $7.6B |
| Share price | $186.32 | $47.81 |
| Change, 1 year | 0.37% | 284% |
| Change, 5 years | 124% | – |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.46 | 0.03 |
| Employees | 46K | 47K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 19 (better) | 12 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Growth score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 29.2× | 27.3× (better) |
| P/S | 2.0× | 1.4× (better) |
| P/B | 4.4× (better) | 6.8× |
| EV/EBITDA | 18.4× (better) | 18.7× |
| PEG | 2.10 (better) | 19.45 |
| Fair value | $151.76 | $39.82 |
| Margin of safety | −22.8% | −20.1% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 18.9% (better) | 15.2% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 16.1% | – |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 17.3% | 104% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 15.8% | 113% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 13.8% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 20.7% | 23.5% (better) |
| Operating margin | 8.5% (better) | 7.4% |
| Net margin | 6.9% (better) | 4.8% |
| Return on equity | 17.0% | 28.1% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 17.7% | 29.4% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.06 (better) | 0.22 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.31 | 0.20 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 60.0× (better) | 13.9× |
| Current ratio | 1.21 (better) | 0.91 |
| Altman Z-score | 3.71 (better) | 2.32 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.14% | – |
| Payout ratio | 3.9% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 15 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 4.5% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.37% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 0.51% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 90.6% | 31.3% |
| Held by insiders | 3.6% | 78.7% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$13.6M (better) | −$79.4M |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.6% | 12.2% |
Go deeper
- ENSG stock overview
- ENSG income statement
- ENSG valuation and score
- PACS stock overview
- PACS income statement
- PACS valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.