CHE vs SCI

For growth investors, Chemed Corporation (CHE) is the stronger pick with 4.

1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 2. 9% for Service Corporation International (SCI). Service Corporation International (SCI) offers the better valuation at 20. 9x trailing P/E (18. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Service Corporation International (SCI) a "Buy" — based on 9 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.

On trailing P/E, Service Corporation International (SCI) is the cheapest at 20.

9x versus Chemed Corporation at 23. 2x. On forward P/E, Chemed Corporation is actually cheaper at 17. 4x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Service Corporation International (SCI) delivered a total return of +52.

6%, compared to -8. 4% for Chemed Corporation (CHE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CHE returned +239. 1% versus SCI's +226. 8%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Service Corporation International (SCI) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

11β versus Chemed Corporation's 0. 33β — meaning CHE is approximately 188% more volatile than SCI relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Chemed Corporation (CHE) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 16% versus 3% for Service Corporation International — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Chemed Corporation (CHE) is pulling ahead at 4.

1% versus 2. 9% for Service Corporation International (SCI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Service Corporation International grew EPS 7. 6% year-over-year, compared to -7. 4% for Chemed Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, CHE leads at 5. 8% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.

Service Corporation International (SCI) is the more profitable company, earning 12.

6% net margin versus 10. 5% for Chemed Corporation — meaning it keeps 12. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: SCI leads at 22. 6% versus 13. 4% for CHE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CHE leads at 30. 0%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.

On forward earnings alone, Chemed Corporation (CHE) trades at 17.

4x forward P/E versus 18. 8x for Service Corporation International — 1. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for SCI: 17. 0% to $93. 00.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Service Corporation International (SCI) offers the highest yield at 1. 6%, versus 0. 5% for Chemed Corporation (CHE).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Service Corporation International (SCI) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

11), 1. 6% yield, +226. 8% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (SCI: +226. 8%, CHE: +239. 1%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.

These companies operate in different sectors (CHE (Healthcare) and SCI (Consumer Cyclical)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.