Medical - Care Facilities
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
HCSG vs CTAS vs ABM vs KELYA vs MAN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Specialty Business Services
Specialty Business Services
Staffing & Employment Services
Staffing & Employment Services
HCSG vs CTAS vs ABM vs KELYA vs MAN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Care Facilities | Specialty Business Services | Specialty Business Services | Staffing & Employment Services | Staffing & Employment Services |
| Market Cap | $1.60B | $68.52B | $2.39B | $349M | $1.41B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.84B | $10.79B | $8.87B | $3.09B | $17.96B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $59M | $1.90B | $158M | $-266M | $-13M |
| Gross Margin | 13.3% | 50.2% | 11.5% | 26.3% | 16.7% |
| Operating Margin | 3.0% | 23.0% | 3.7% | -2.8% | 0.8% |
| Forward P/E | 20.8x | 34.8x | 10.3x | 11.0x | 8.3x |
| Total Debt | $25M | $2.65B | $1.69B | $159M | $2.39B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $161M | $264M | $104M | $33M | $871M |
HCSG vs CTAS vs ABM vs KELYA vs MAN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Healthcare Services… (HCSG) | 100 | 93.3 | -6.7% |
| Cintas Corporation (CTAS) | 100 | 274.3 | +174.3% |
| ABM Industries Inco… (ABM) | 100 | 132.6 | +32.6% |
| Kelly Services, Inc. (KELYA) | 100 | 64.7 | -35.3% |
| ManpowerGroup Inc. (MAN) | 100 | 44.0 | -56.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: HCSG vs CTAS vs ABM vs KELYA vs MAN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
HCSG is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if momentum is your priority.
- +55.8% vs CTAS's -20.1%
CTAS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 7.7%, EPS growth 16.1%, 3Y rev CAGR 9.6%
- 6.9% 10Y total return vs ABM's 48.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.51, Low D/E 56.7%, current ratio 2.09x
- Beta 0.51, yield 0.9%, current ratio 2.09x
ABM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and valuation efficiency.
- Dividend streak 36 yrs, beta 0.72, yield 2.6%
- PEG 0.04 vs CTAS's 2.08
- Lower P/E (10.3x vs 34.8x), PEG 0.04 vs 2.08
Among these 5 stocks, KELYA doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
MAN is the clearest fit if your priority is dividends.
- 4.7% yield, vs ABM's 2.6%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 7.7% revenue growth vs KELYA's -1.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (10.3x vs 34.8x), PEG 0.04 vs 2.08 | |
| Quality / Margins | 17.6% margin vs KELYA's -8.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.51 vs HCSG's 1.12 | |
| Dividends | 4.7% yield, vs ABM's 2.6%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +55.8% vs CTAS's -20.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 18.7% ROA vs KELYA's -11.3%, ROIC 25.8% vs -4.0% |
HCSG vs CTAS vs ABM vs KELYA vs MAN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
HCSG vs CTAS vs ABM vs KELYA vs MAN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CTAS leads in 3 of 6 categories
MAN leads 1 • HCSG leads 0 • ABM leads 0 • KELYA leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CTAS leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MAN is the larger business by revenue, generating $18.0B annually — 9.8x HCSG's $1.8B. CTAS is the more profitable business, keeping 17.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to KELYA's -8.6%. On growth, CTAS holds the edge at +9.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.8B | $10.8B | $8.9B | $3.1B | $18.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $72M | $2.9B | $431M | -$54M | $236M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $59M | $1.9B | $158M | -$266M | -$13M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $139M | $1.8B | $327M | $66M | -$161M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +13.3% | +50.2% | +11.5% | +26.3% | +16.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +3.0% | +23.0% | +3.7% | -2.8% | +0.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +3.2% | +17.6% | +1.8% | -8.6% | -0.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +7.6% | +16.5% | +3.7% | +2.1% | -0.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +6.6% | +9.3% | +6.1% | -100.0% | +7.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +175.0% | +11.0% | -7.2% | -2.1% | +36.2% |
Valuation Metrics
MAN leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.7x trailing earnings, ABM trades at a 59% valuation discount to CTAS's 38.6x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ABM offers better value at 0.05x vs CTAS's 2.31x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.6B | $68.5B | $2.4B | $349M | $1.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.5B | $70.9B | $4.0B | $475M | $2.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 27.54x | 38.65x | 15.74x | -1.34x | -104.90x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 20.83x | 34.75x | 10.30x | 10.96x | 8.28x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.31x | 0.05x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 22.38x | 24.85x | 9.23x | — | 9.02x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.87x | 6.63x | 0.27x | 0.08x | 0.08x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.19x | 14.89x | 1.43x | 0.35x | 0.69x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 11.49x | 39.00x | 15.40x | 3.06x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
CTAS leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CTAS delivers a 42.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $43 in annual profit, vs $-25 for KELYA. HCSG carries lower financial leverage with a 0.05x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MAN's 1.16x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CTAS scores 9/9 vs MAN's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +11.8% | +42.6% | +8.8% | -24.6% | -0.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +7.3% | +18.7% | +3.0% | -11.3% | -0.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +9.0% | +25.8% | +7.5% | -4.0% | +5.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +7.7% | +29.8% | +8.2% | -4.3% | +6.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 9 | 6 | 5 | 1 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.05x | 0.57x | 0.95x | 0.16x | 1.16x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$136M | $2.4B | $1.6B | $126M | $1.5B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $161M | $264M | $104M | $33M | $871M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $25M | $2.7B | $1.7B | $159M | $2.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 33.02x | 24.61x | 3.25x | -12.07x | 1.98x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CTAS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CTAS five years ago would be worth $19,584 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,514 for MAN. Over the past 12 months, HCSG leads with a +55.8% total return vs CTAS's -20.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CTAS at 14.9% vs MAN's -18.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +28.6% | -7.8% | -3.1% | +13.1% | +1.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +55.8% | -20.1% | -16.0% | -12.2% | -17.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +48.6% | +51.7% | +3.4% | -34.2% | -46.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -21.1% | +95.8% | -14.1% | -58.3% | -64.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -26.8% | +685.0% | +48.7% | -33.0% | -30.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +14.1% | +14.9% | +1.1% | -13.0% | -18.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — HCSG and CTAS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CTAS is the less volatile stock with a 0.51 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than HCSG's 1.12 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. HCSG currently trades 91.5% from its 52-week high vs MAN's 64.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.12x | 0.51x | 0.72x | 1.01x | 1.03x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $24.39 | $229.24 | $52.94 | $14.94 | $47.34 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $12.66 | $165.46 | $36.96 | $7.98 | $25.15 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +91.5% | +74.2% | +77.0% | +64.9% | +64.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 61.8 | 37.7 | 54.8 | 63.7 | 47.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 676K | 2.2M | 512K | 361K | 1.1M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — ABM and MAN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: HCSG as "Hold", CTAS as "Hold", ABM as "Hold", KELYA as "Buy", MAN as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 54.6% upside for KELYA (target: $15) vs 9.8% for HCSG (target: $25). For income investors, MAN offers the higher dividend yield at 4.71% vs CTAS's 0.88%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Hold | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $24.50 | $223.40 | $50.00 | $15.00 | $37.86 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 15 | 30 | 11 | 5 | 29 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.9% | +2.6% | +3.2% | +4.7% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 20 | 3 | 36 | 5 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.49 | $1.05 | $0.31 | $1.43 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +3.9% | +1.4% | +5.1% | +3.5% | +2.7% |
CTAS leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). MAN leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
HCSG vs CTAS vs ABM vs KELYA vs MAN: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is HCSG or CTAS or ABM or KELYA or MAN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Cintas Corporation (CTAS) is the stronger pick with 7.
7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -1. 9% for Kelly Services, Inc. (KELYA). ABM Industries Incorporated (ABM) offers the better valuation at 15. 7x trailing P/E (10. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Kelly Services, Inc. (KELYA) a "Buy" — based on 5 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 — HCSG or CTAS or ABM or KELYA or MAN?
On trailing P/E, ABM Industries Incorporated (ABM) is the cheapest at 15.
7x versus Cintas Corporation at 38. 6x. On forward P/E, ManpowerGroup Inc. is actually cheaper at 8. 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: ABM Industries Incorporated wins at 0. 04x versus Cintas Corporation's 2. 08x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — HCSG or CTAS or ABM or KELYA or MAN?
Over the past 5 years, Cintas Corporation (CTAS) delivered a total return of +95.
8%, compared to -64. 9% for ManpowerGroup Inc. (MAN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CTAS returned +685. 0% versus KELYA's -33. 0%. 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 — HCSG or CTAS or ABM or KELYA or MAN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Cintas Corporation (CTAS) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
51β versus Healthcare Services Group, Inc. 's 1. 12β — meaning HCSG is approximately 121% more volatile than CTAS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Healthcare Services Group, Inc. (HCSG) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 5% versus 116% for ManpowerGroup Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — HCSG or CTAS or ABM or KELYA or MAN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Cintas Corporation (CTAS) is pulling ahead at 7.
7% versus -1. 9% for Kelly Services, Inc. (KELYA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: ABM Industries Incorporated grew EPS 102. 3% year-over-year, compared to -427. 4% for Kelly Services, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CTAS leads at 9. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — HCSG or CTAS or ABM or KELYA or MAN?
Cintas Corporation (CTAS) is the more profitable company, earning 17.
5% net margin versus -6. 0% for Kelly Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 17. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CTAS leads at 22. 8% versus -1. 6% for KELYA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CTAS leads at 50. 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.
07Is HCSG or CTAS or ABM or KELYA or MAN 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, ABM Industries Incorporated (ABM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 04x versus Cintas Corporation's 2. 08x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, ManpowerGroup Inc. (MAN) trades at 8. 3x forward P/E versus 34. 8x for Cintas Corporation — 26. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for KELYA: 54. 6% to $15. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — HCSG or CTAS or ABM or KELYA or MAN?
In this comparison, MAN (4.
7% yield), KELYA (3. 2% yield), ABM (2. 6% yield), CTAS (0. 9% yield) pay a dividend. HCSG does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is HCSG or CTAS or ABM or KELYA or MAN better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Cintas Corporation (CTAS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
51), 0. 9% yield, +685. 0% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CTAS: +685. 0%, HCSG: -26. 8%), 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 HCSG and CTAS and ABM and KELYA and MAN?
These companies operate in different sectors (HCSG (Healthcare) and CTAS (Industrials) and ABM (Industrials) and KELYA (Industrials) and MAN (Industrials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: HCSG is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CTAS is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; ABM is a small-cap deep-value stock; KELYA is a small-cap income-oriented stock; MAN is a small-cap income-oriented stock. CTAS, ABM, KELYA, MAN pay a dividend while HCSG does 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.