Cvs Health vs McKesson
CVS and MCK side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CVS and MCK compare
Cvs Health and McKesson are about the same size, with market caps of $114B and $126B.
On earnings, Cvs Health is cheaper: it trades at 10.4× trailing earnings, against 27.8× for McKesson.
McKesson grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (8.2% versus 6.7% for Cvs Health).
Cvs Health keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 2.6% compared with 1.1% at McKesson.
Both pay dividends: Cvs Health yields 2.2% and McKesson 0.31%.
Cvs Health scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 16 for McKesson), 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 | CVS | MCK |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $114B | $126B |
| Share price | $89.52 | $1079.79 |
| Change, 1 year | 15.5% | 25.6% |
| Change, 5 years | −3.9% | 389% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.50 | 0.30 |
| Employees | 300K | 43K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 19 (better) | 16 |
| Valuation score | 6 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend score | 4 | 4 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 10.4× (better) | 27.8× |
| P/S | 0.3× (better) | 0.3× |
| P/B | 1.4× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.2× (better) | 18.4× |
| P/FCF | 7.4× (better) | 17.7× |
| PEG | – | 1.81 |
| FCF yield | 13.6% (better) | 5.6% |
| Fair value | $129.23 | $881.37 |
| Margin of safety | 30.7% (better) | −22.5% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 6.7% | 8.2% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 8.4% | 11.1% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 2253% (better) | 16.5% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 2158% (better) | 21.0% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −23.9% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 44.2% (better) | 3.7% |
| Operating margin | 3.6% (better) | 1.6% |
| Net margin | 2.6% (better) | 1.1% |
| FCF margin | 3.7% (better) | 1.7% |
| Return on equity | 14.4% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 10.8% | 1481% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.75 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.34 | 0.38 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 4.9× | 21.9× (better) |
| Current ratio | 0.85 | 0.90 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 2.51 | 5.83 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.2% (better) | 0.31% |
| Payout ratio | 31.0% | 8.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 13 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 5.9% | 13.7% (better) |
| Buyback yield | – | 5.4% |
| Shareholder yield | 2.2% | 5.7% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 89.2% | 90.4% |
| Held by insiders | 0.43% | 0.05% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$322M | −$30.1M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 6 (better) | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.4% | 1.7% |
Go deeper
- CVS stock overview
- CVS income statement
- CVS valuation and score
- MCK stock overview
- MCK income statement
- MCK valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.