Medical - Distribution
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
COR vs MCK vs CAH vs OMI vs HSIC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Distribution
Medical - Distribution
Medical - Distribution
Medical - Distribution
COR vs MCK vs CAH vs OMI vs HSIC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Distribution | Medical - Distribution | Medical - Distribution | Medical - Distribution | Medical - Distribution |
| Market Cap | $49.73B | $92.15B | $43.59B | $171M | $8.09B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $328.68B | $403.43B | $250.55B | $2.76B | $13.18B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $2.55B | $4.76B | $1.56B | $-1.10B | $398M |
| Gross Margin | 3.5% | 3.6% | 3.7% | — | 29.1% |
| Operating Margin | 1.2% | 1.5% | 0.9% | 1.0% | 5.8% |
| Forward P/E | 14.5x | 19.3x | 17.9x | 2.3x | 13.3x |
| Total Debt | $10.75B | $7.39B | $9.35B | $320M | $3.69B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $4.39B | $5.69B | $3.87B | $282M | $156M |
COR vs MCK vs CAH vs OMI vs HSIC — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cencora, Inc. (COR) | 100 | 268.2 | +168.2% |
| McKesson Corporation (MCK) | 100 | 474.1 | +374.1% |
| Cardinal Health, In… (CAH) | 100 | 338.7 | +238.7% |
| Owens & Minor, Inc. (OMI) | 100 | 27.9 | -72.1% |
| Henry Schein, Inc. (HSIC) | 100 | 116.1 | +16.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: COR vs MCK vs CAH vs OMI vs HSIC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
COR lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
MCK carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 16.2%, EPS growth 14.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 10.8%
- 348.1% 10Y total return vs COR's 269.7%
- PEG 0.49 vs HSIC's 4.21
- 16.2% revenue growth vs OMI's -74.2%
CAH is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Dividend streak 20 yrs, beta 0.03, yield 1.1%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.03, current ratio 0.94x
- Beta 0.03, yield 1.1%, current ratio 0.94x
- Beta 0.03 vs OMI's 1.44
Among these 5 stocks, OMI doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
HSIC ranks third and is worth considering specifically for quality.
- 3.0% margin vs OMI's -39.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 16.2% revenue growth vs OMI's -74.2% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 3.0% margin vs OMI's -39.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.03 vs OMI's 1.44 | |
| Dividends | 1.1% yield, 20-year raise streak, vs COR's 0.9%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +22.0% vs OMI's -71.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 5.7% ROA vs OMI's -44.9%, ROIC 5.4% vs 1.8% |
COR vs MCK vs CAH vs OMI vs HSIC — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
COR vs MCK vs CAH vs OMI vs HSIC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CAH leads in 2 of 6 categories
HSIC leads 1 • OMI leads 1 • MCK leads 1 • COR leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HSIC leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MCK is the larger business by revenue, generating $403.4B annually — 146.1x OMI's $2.8B. HSIC is the more profitable business, keeping 3.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to OMI's -39.8%. On growth, CAH holds the edge at +11.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $328.7B | $403.4B | $250.5B | $2.8B | $13.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $5.0B | $6.8B | $3.2B | $277M | $1.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $2.5B | $4.8B | $1.6B | -$1.1B | $398M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $1.6B | $6.0B | $4.4B | -$353M | $561M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +3.5% | +3.6% | +3.7% | — | +29.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +1.2% | +1.5% | +0.9% | +1.0% | +5.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +0.8% | +1.2% | +0.6% | -39.8% | +3.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +0.5% | +1.5% | +1.8% | -12.8% | +4.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +3.8% | +6.0% | +11.0% | -146.3% | +7.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +128.3% | +37.0% | -19.5% | +4.5% | +14.9% |
Valuation Metrics
OMI leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 21.6x trailing earnings, HSIC trades at a 33% valuation discount to COR's 32.1x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), MCK offers better value at 0.75x vs HSIC's 6.84x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $49.7B | $92.1B | $43.6B | $171M | $8.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $56.1B | $93.8B | $49.1B | $209M | $11.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 32.12x | 29.25x | 28.72x | -0.16x | 21.56x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 14.52x | 19.28x | 17.94x | 2.31x | 13.26x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.75x | — | — | 6.84x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 11.92x | 18.74x | 16.01x | 1.70x | 10.87x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.15x | 0.26x | 0.20x | 0.06x | 0.61x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 28.57x | — | — | — | 1.79x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 15.51x | 17.63x | 23.56x | — | 14.12x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MCK leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MCK delivers a 3.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $3 in annual profit, vs $-21 for OMI. HSIC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.77x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to COR's 6.15x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), COR scores 6/9 vs OMI's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +105.8% | +3.0% | — | -21.1% | +8.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.3% | +5.7% | +2.8% | -44.9% | +3.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +44.5% | +5.4% | +33.8% | +1.8% | +7.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +23.1% | +30.5% | +19.2% | +1.3% | +9.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 2 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 6.15x | — | — | — | 0.77x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $6.4B | $1.7B | $5.5B | $38M | $3.5B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $4.4B | $5.7B | $3.9B | $282M | $156M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $10.7B | $7.4B | $9.3B | $320M | $3.7B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 3.73x | 33.79x | 6.38x | -0.12x | 4.59x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CAH leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MCK five years ago would be worth $38,689 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $655 for OMI. Over the past 12 months, CAH leads with a +22.0% total return vs OMI's -71.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CAH at 31.5% vs OMI's -49.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -24.4% | -8.5% | -9.5% | -3.4% | -8.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -15.3% | +4.6% | +22.0% | -71.1% | +5.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +55.8% | +106.4% | +127.3% | -87.4% | -11.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +119.9% | +286.9% | +235.7% | -93.5% | -12.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +269.7% | +348.1% | +160.8% | -86.2% | +5.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +15.9% | +27.3% | +31.5% | -49.9% | -4.0% |
Risk & Volatility
CAH leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CAH is the less volatile stock with a 0.03 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than OMI's 1.44 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CAH currently trades 79.3% from its 52-week high vs OMI's 23.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.13x | 0.04x | 0.03x | 1.44x | 0.73x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $377.54 | $999.00 | $233.60 | $9.55 | $89.29 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $244.82 | $637.00 | $137.75 | $1.84 | $61.95 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +67.7% | +75.3% | +79.3% | +23.5% | +79.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 16.8 | 16.2 | 33.2 | 46.5 | 39.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.5M | 757K | 1.7M | 690K | 1.2M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — COR and CAH each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: COR as "Buy", MCK as "Buy", CAH as "Buy", OMI as "Hold", HSIC as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 78.6% upside for OMI (target: $4) vs 22.6% for HSIC (target: $86). For income investors, CAH offers the higher dividend yield at 1.10% vs MCK's 0.36%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $409.14 | $1006.50 | $249.67 | $4.00 | $86.43 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 46 | 31 | 33 | 10 | 32 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.9% | +0.4% | +1.1% | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 24 | 17 | 20 | 0 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $2.24 | $2.69 | $2.04 | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.9% | +3.4% | +1.8% | 0.0% | +10.5% |
CAH leads in 2 of 6 categories (Total Returns, Risk & Volatility). HSIC leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 1 tied.
COR vs MCK vs CAH vs OMI vs HSIC: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is COR or MCK or CAH or OMI or HSIC a better buy right now?
For growth investors, McKesson Corporation (MCK) is the stronger pick with 16.
2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -74. 2% for Owens & Minor, Inc. (OMI). Henry Schein, Inc. (HSIC) offers the better valuation at 21. 6x trailing P/E (13. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Cencora, Inc. (COR) a "Buy" — based on 46 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.
02Which has the better valuation — COR or MCK or CAH or OMI or HSIC?
On trailing P/E, Henry Schein, Inc.
(HSIC) is the cheapest at 21. 6x versus Cencora, Inc. at 32. 1x. On forward P/E, Owens & Minor, Inc. is actually cheaper at 2. 3x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: McKesson Corporation wins at 0. 49x versus Henry Schein, Inc. 's 4. 21x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — COR or MCK or CAH or OMI or HSIC?
Over the past 5 years, McKesson Corporation (MCK) delivered a total return of +286.
9%, compared to -93. 5% for Owens & Minor, Inc. (OMI). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MCK returned +348. 1% versus OMI's -86. 2%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — COR or MCK or CAH or OMI or HSIC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Cardinal Health, Inc.
(CAH) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 03β versus Owens & Minor, Inc. 's 1. 44β — meaning OMI is approximately 4160% more volatile than CAH relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Henry Schein, Inc. (HSIC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 77% versus 6% for Cencora, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — COR or MCK or CAH or OMI or HSIC?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), McKesson Corporation (MCK) is pulling ahead at 16.
2% versus -74. 2% for Owens & Minor, Inc. (OMI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Cardinal Health, Inc. grew EPS 87. 0% year-over-year, compared to -201. 1% for Owens & Minor, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, MCK leads at 10. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — COR or MCK or CAH or OMI or HSIC?
Henry Schein, Inc.
(HSIC) is the more profitable company, earning 3. 0% net margin versus -39. 8% for Owens & Minor, Inc. — meaning it keeps 3. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HSIC leads at 5. 7% versus 1. 0% for OMI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — HSIC leads at 29. 1%, 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.
07Is COR or MCK or CAH or OMI or HSIC more undervalued right now?
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, McKesson Corporation (MCK) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 49x versus Henry Schein, Inc. 's 4. 21x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Owens & Minor, Inc. (OMI) trades at 2. 3x forward P/E versus 19. 3x for McKesson Corporation — 17. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for OMI: 78. 6% to $4. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — COR or MCK or CAH or OMI or HSIC?
In this comparison, CAH (1.
1% yield), COR (0. 9% yield), MCK (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. OMI, HSIC do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is COR or MCK or CAH or OMI or HSIC better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Cardinal Health, Inc.
(CAH) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 03), 1. 1% yield, +160. 8% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CAH: +160. 8%, OMI: -86. 2%), 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.
10What are the main differences between COR and MCK and CAH and OMI and HSIC?
Both stocks operate in the Healthcare sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: COR is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; MCK is a mid-cap high-growth stock; CAH is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; OMI is a small-cap quality compounder stock; HSIC is a small-cap quality compounder stock. COR, CAH pay a dividend while MCK, OMI, HSIC do not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.