Canadian Pacific Kansas City vs Norfolk Southern
CP and NSC side by side, both in industrials. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CP and NSC compare
Canadian Pacific Kansas City grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (6.5% versus 6.0% for Norfolk Southern).
Canadian Pacific Kansas City keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 24.1% compared with 20.7% at Norfolk Southern.
Norfolk Southern pays a dividend yielding 1.2%; Canadian Pacific Kansas City does not pay one.
Norfolk Southern scores higher on the StockData Score (11 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 | NSC |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | – | $73.6B |
| Share price | $94.15 | $327.88 |
| Change, 1 year | 30.0% | 14.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 25.8% | 19.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.62 | 0.77 |
| Employees | 12K | 19K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 6 | 11 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 2 | 2 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 27.5× |
| P/S | – | 5.7× |
| P/B | – | 4.4× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 16.1× |
| P/FCF | – | 44.7× |
| FCF yield | – | 2.2% |
| Fair value | – | $245.31 |
| Margin of safety | – | −33.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 6.5% (better) | 6.0% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 14.4% (better) | 4.5% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −9.4% | −9.4% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −5.9% (better) | −9.1% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 4.7% | 10.2% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 36.4% (better) | 31.5% |
| Net margin | 24.1% (better) | 20.7% |
| FCF margin | 18.4% (better) | 12.7% |
| Return on equity | 8.4% | 16.8% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 6.0% | 10.2% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.56 (better) | 0.99 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.22 | 2.72 (better) |
| Interest coverage | – | 5.2× |
| Current ratio | 0.52 | 0.90 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | – | 2.52 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 1.2% |
| Payout ratio | 21.9% | 45.2% |
| Years of dividend growth | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 4.2% | 7.5% (better) |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.01% |
| Shareholder yield | – | 1.2% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 71.1% | 76.1% |
| Held by insiders | 0.00% | 0.05% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | $60.1K |
| Superinvestors holding | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 2.6% |
Go deeper
- CP stock overview
- CP income statement
- CP valuation and score
- NSC stock overview
- NSC income statement
- NSC valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.