Medical - Distribution
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
HSIC vs CAH vs MCK vs OMI
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Distribution
Medical - Distribution
Medical - Distribution
HSIC vs CAH vs MCK vs OMI — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Distribution | Medical - Distribution | Medical - Distribution | Medical - Distribution |
| Market Cap | $8.09B | $43.59B | $92.15B | $171M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $13.18B | $250.55B | $403.43B | $2.76B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $398M | $1.56B | $4.76B | $-1.10B |
| Gross Margin | 29.1% | 3.7% | 3.6% | — |
| Operating Margin | 5.8% | 0.9% | 1.5% | 1.0% |
| Forward P/E | 13.3x | 17.9x | 19.3x | 2.3x |
| Total Debt | $3.69B | $9.35B | $7.39B | $320M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $156M | $3.87B | $5.69B | $282M |
HSIC vs CAH vs MCK vs OMI — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Henry Schein, Inc. (HSIC) | 100 | 116.1 | +16.1% |
| Cardinal Health, In… (CAH) | 100 | 338.7 | +238.7% |
| McKesson Corporation (MCK) | 100 | 474.1 | +374.1% |
| Owens & Minor, Inc. (OMI) | 100 | 27.9 | -72.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: HSIC vs CAH vs MCK vs OMI
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
HSIC is the clearest fit if your priority is quality.
- 3.0% margin vs OMI's -39.8%
CAH carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- 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
MCK is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 16.2%, EPS growth 14.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 10.8%
- 348.1% 10Y total return vs CAH's 160.8%
- PEG 0.49 vs HSIC's 4.21
- 16.2% revenue growth vs OMI's -74.2%
OMI lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
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 MCK's 0.4%, (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% |
HSIC vs CAH vs MCK vs OMI — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
HSIC vs CAH vs MCK vs OMI — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CAH leads in 3 of 6 categories
HSIC leads 1 • OMI leads 1 • MCK leads 1
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 | $13.2B | $250.5B | $403.4B | $2.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $1.1B | $3.2B | $6.8B | $277M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $398M | $1.6B | $4.8B | -$1.1B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $561M | $4.4B | $6.0B | -$353M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +29.1% | +3.7% | +3.6% | — |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +5.8% | +0.9% | +1.5% | +1.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +3.0% | +0.6% | +1.2% | -39.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +4.3% | +1.8% | +1.5% | -12.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +7.7% | +11.0% | +6.0% | -146.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +14.9% | -19.5% | +37.0% | +4.5% |
Valuation Metrics
OMI leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 21.6x trailing earnings, HSIC trades at a 26% valuation discount to MCK's 29.2x 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 | $8.1B | $43.6B | $92.1B | $171M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $11.6B | $49.1B | $93.8B | $209M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 21.56x | 28.72x | 29.25x | -0.16x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 13.26x | 17.94x | 19.28x | 2.31x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 6.84x | — | 0.75x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 10.87x | 16.01x | 18.74x | 1.70x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.61x | 0.20x | 0.26x | 0.06x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.79x | — | — | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 14.12x | 23.56x | 17.63x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
MCK leads this category, winning 5 of 8 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. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CAH scores 6/9 vs OMI's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +8.2% | — | +3.0% | -21.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.6% | +2.8% | +5.7% | -44.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.1% | +33.8% | +5.4% | +1.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +9.8% | +19.2% | +30.5% | +1.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 6 | 6 | 2 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.77x | — | — | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $3.5B | $5.5B | $1.7B | $38M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $156M | $3.9B | $5.7B | $282M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $3.7B | $9.3B | $7.4B | $320M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 4.59x | 6.38x | 33.79x | -0.12x |
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 | -8.2% | -9.5% | -8.5% | -3.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +5.9% | +22.0% | +4.6% | -71.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -11.7% | +127.3% | +106.4% | -87.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -12.5% | +235.7% | +286.9% | -93.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +5.3% | +160.8% | +348.1% | -86.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -4.0% | +31.5% | +27.3% | -49.9% |
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 | 0.73x | 0.03x | 0.04x | 1.44x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $89.29 | $233.60 | $999.00 | $9.55 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $61.95 | $137.75 | $637.00 | $1.84 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +79.0% | +79.3% | +75.3% | +23.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 39.1 | 33.2 | 16.2 | 46.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.2M | 1.7M | 757K | 690K |
Analyst Outlook
CAH leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: HSIC as "Hold", CAH as "Buy", MCK as "Buy", OMI 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 | Hold | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $86.43 | $249.67 | $1006.50 | $4.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 32 | 33 | 31 | 10 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.1% | +0.4% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 20 | 17 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $2.04 | $2.69 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +10.5% | +1.8% | +3.4% | 0.0% |
CAH leads in 3 of 6 categories (Total Returns, Risk & Volatility). HSIC leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow).
HSIC vs CAH vs MCK vs OMI: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is HSIC or CAH or MCK or OMI 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 Cardinal Health, Inc. (CAH) a "Buy" — based on 33 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 — HSIC or CAH or MCK or OMI?
On trailing P/E, Henry Schein, Inc.
(HSIC) is the cheapest at 21. 6x versus McKesson Corporation at 29. 2x. 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 — HSIC or CAH or MCK or OMI?
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 — HSIC or CAH or MCK or OMI?
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.
05Which is growing faster — HSIC or CAH or MCK or OMI?
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 — HSIC or CAH or MCK or OMI?
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 HSIC or CAH or MCK or OMI 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 — HSIC or CAH or MCK or OMI?
In this comparison, CAH (1.
1% yield), MCK (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. HSIC, OMI do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is HSIC or CAH or MCK or OMI 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 HSIC and CAH and MCK and OMI?
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: HSIC is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CAH is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; MCK is a mid-cap high-growth stock; OMI is a small-cap quality compounder stock. CAH pays a dividend while HSIC, MCK, OMI 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.
Compare HSIC vs DXPE
DXPE is one of the most direct listed alternatives to HSIC.
Compare MCK vs CVS
CVS overlaps with MCK in an adjacent operating segment worth comparing.
Add BDX to This Comparison
BDX is the strongest missing peer across the current compare set.