Cigna vs Elevance Health
CI and ELV side by side, both in accident and health insurance and medical. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CI and ELV compare
Elevance Health is the larger company, worth 1.2 times as much as Cigna ($92.8B against $79.7B).
On earnings, Cigna is cheaper: it trades at 13.3× trailing earnings, against 18.3× for Elevance Health.
Cigna grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (6.8% versus 3.6% for Elevance Health).
Elevance Health keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 2.5% compared with 2.1% at Cigna.
Both pay dividends: Cigna yields 2.1% and Elevance Health 1.6%.
Cigna scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 15 for Elevance 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 | CI | ELV |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $79.7B | $92.8B |
| Share price | $301.45 | $429.48 |
| Change, 1 year | 16.8% | 41.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 43.2% | 3.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.34 | 0.45 |
| Employees | 68K | 97K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 (better) | 15 |
| Valuation score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 3 | 3 |
| Health score | 2 | 2 |
| Dividend score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 13.3× (better) | 18.3× |
| P/S | 0.3× (better) | 0.5× |
| P/B | 1.8× (better) | 2.1× |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.2× (better) | 12.7× |
| P/FCF | – | 14.2× |
| PEG | 11.23 (better) | 14.53 |
| FCF yield | – | 7.0% |
| Fair value | $383.88 | $498.02 |
| Margin of safety | 21.5% (better) | 13.8% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 6.8% (better) | 3.6% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 11.4% (better) | 10.3% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | −7.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −0.04% (better) | −4.1% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −0.69% | 7.0% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 20.7% | 89.0% (better) |
| Operating margin | 3.4% (better) | 2.7% |
| Net margin | 2.1% | 2.5% (better) |
| FCF margin | – | 3.2% |
| Return on equity | 14.1% (better) | 11.6% |
| Return on invested capital | 11.4% (better) | 11.0% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.72 | 0.69 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.88 (better) | −0.71 |
| Interest coverage | 7.1× (better) | 3.8× |
| Current ratio | 0.84 | 1.47 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.83 | 3.00 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.1% (better) | 1.6% |
| Payout ratio | 27.2% | 29.2% |
| Years of dividend growth | 5 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 173% | – |
| Buyback yield | 1.7% | 2.3% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 3.7% | 3.9% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 89.9% | 94.3% |
| Held by insiders | 0.41% | 0.18% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$66.8M | −$4.7M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 4 | 8 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.4% | 2.1% |
Go deeper
- CI stock overview
- CI income statement
- CI valuation and score
- ELV stock overview
- ELV income statement
- ELV valuation and score
Other comparisons
- CAH vs CI
- CI vs CNC
- CI vs COR
- CI vs CVS
- CI vs HUM
- CI vs UNH
- CNC vs ELV
- CVS vs ELV
- ELV vs HUM
- ELV vs MOH
- ELV vs UNH
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.