CNI vs CP vs UNP

For growth investors, Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd.

(CP) is the stronger pick with 3. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 1% for Union Pacific Corporation (UNP). Canadian National Railway Company (CNI) offers the better valuation at 20. 0x trailing P/E (13. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd. (CP) a "Buy" — based on 43 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, Canadian National Railway Company (CNI) is the cheapest at 20.

0x versus Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd. at 25. 8x. On forward P/E, Canadian National Railway Company is actually cheaper at 13. 8x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Canadian National Railway Company wins at 1. 60x versus Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd. 's 4. 84x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.

Over the past 5 years, Union Pacific Corporation (UNP) delivered a total return of +26.

6%, compared to +9. 1% for Canadian National Railway Company (CNI). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: UNP returned +261. 9% versus CNI's +121. 9%. 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), Union Pacific Corporation (UNP) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

64β versus Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd. 's 0. 70β — meaning CP is approximately 10% more volatile than UNP relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd. (CP) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 50% versus 172% for Union Pacific Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd.

(CP) is pulling ahead at 3. 7% versus 1. 1% for Union Pacific Corporation (UNP). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd. grew EPS 13. 3% year-over-year, compared to 7. 8% for Canadian National Railway Company. Over a 3-year CAGR, CP leads at 19. 6% 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.

Union Pacific Corporation (UNP) is the more profitable company, earning 29.

1% net margin versus 27. 3% for Canadian National Railway Company — meaning it keeps 29. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: UNP leads at 40. 1% versus 37. 2% for CP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — UNP leads at 59. 4%, 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.

The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.

By this metric, Canadian National Railway Company (CNI) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 60x versus Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd. 's 4. 84x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Canadian National Railway Company (CNI) trades at 13. 8x forward P/E versus 22. 6x for Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd. — 8. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for UNP: 8. 5% to $287. 30.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Canadian National Railway Company (CNI) offers the highest yield at 2. 3%, versus 0. 7% for Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd. (CP).

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

64), 2. 1% yield, +261. 9% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (UNP: +261. 9%, CNI: +121. 9%), 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.

Both stocks operate in the Industrials sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

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.