GEO vs UHS

For growth investors, Universal Health Services, Inc.

(UHS) is the stronger pick with 9. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 8. 6% for The GEO Group, Inc. (GEO). Universal Health Services, Inc. (UHS) offers the better valuation at 7. 4x trailing P/E (7. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate The GEO Group, Inc. (GEO) a "Buy" — based on 12 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, Universal Health Services, Inc.

(UHS) is the cheapest at 7. 4x versus The GEO Group, Inc. at 11. 7x. On forward P/E, Universal Health Services, Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 3x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Universal Health Services, Inc. wins at 0. 46x versus The GEO Group, Inc. 's 1. 31x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, The GEO Group, Inc.

(GEO) delivered a total return of +269. 6%, compared to +12. 5% for Universal Health Services, Inc. (UHS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: GEO returned +36. 1% versus UHS's +30. 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), Universal Health Services, Inc.

(UHS) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 60β versus The GEO Group, Inc. 's 1. 01β — meaning GEO is approximately 68% more volatile than UHS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Universal Health Services, Inc. (UHS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 74% versus 115% for The GEO Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Universal Health Services, Inc.

(UHS) is pulling ahead at 9. 7% versus 8. 6% for The GEO Group, Inc. (GEO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The GEO Group, Inc. grew EPS 727. 3% year-over-year, compared to 37. 3% for Universal Health Services, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, UHS leads at 9. 0% 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.

The GEO Group, Inc.

(GEO) is the more profitable company, earning 9. 7% net margin versus 8. 6% for Universal Health Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 9. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: UHS leads at 11. 5% versus 9. 8% for GEO. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — UHS leads at 90. 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, Universal Health Services, Inc. (UHS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 46x versus The GEO Group, Inc. 's 1. 31x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Universal Health Services, Inc. (UHS) trades at 7. 3x forward P/E versus 18. 5x for The GEO Group, Inc. — 11. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for UHS: 35. 7% to $231. 50.

In this comparison, UHS (0.

5% yield) pays a dividend. GEO does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Universal Health Services, Inc.

(UHS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 60)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (UHS: +30. 8%, GEO: +36. 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 (GEO (Industrials) and UHS (Healthcare)), 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.