Medical - Care Facilities
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
LFST vs ACHC vs UHS vs SGRY vs ENSG
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Care Facilities
Medical - Care Facilities
Medical - Care Facilities
Medical - Care Facilities
LFST vs ACHC vs UHS vs SGRY vs ENSG — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Care Facilities | Medical - Care Facilities | Medical - Care Facilities | Medical - Care Facilities | Medical - Care Facilities |
| Market Cap | $3.43B | $2.25B | $10.68B | $1.87B | $10.18B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.49B | $3.37B | $17.76B | $3.34B | $5.27B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $23M | $-1.11B | $1.52B | $-76M | $363M |
| Gross Margin | 21.7% | 56.2% | 67.6% | 22.8% | 15.2% |
| Operating Margin | 3.0% | 11.7% | 11.5% | 11.8% | 8.5% |
| Forward P/E | 121.1x | 16.4x | 7.3x | 38.0x | 23.2x |
| Total Debt | $194M | $2.65B | $5.51B | $4.02B | $4.15B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $249M | $133M | $138M | $240M | $504M |
LFST vs ACHC vs UHS vs SGRY vs ENSG — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| LifeStance Health G… (LFST) | 100 | 31.8 | -68.2% |
| Acadia Healthcare C… (ACHC) | 100 | 39.0 | -61.0% |
| Universal Health Se… (UHS) | 100 | 116.5 | +16.5% |
| Surgery Partners, I… (SGRY) | 100 | 21.5 | -78.5% |
| The Ensign Group, I… (ENSG) | 100 | 201.1 | +101.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LFST vs ACHC vs UHS vs SGRY vs ENSG
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LFST ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 13.9%, EPS growth 113.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 18.3%
- +60.6% vs SGRY's -38.2%
ACHC lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
UHS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for sleep-well-at-night and valuation efficiency.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.60, Low D/E 74.3%, current ratio 1.05x
- PEG 0.46 vs ENSG's 1.68
- Beta 0.60, yield 0.5%, current ratio 1.05x
- Lower P/E (7.3x vs 23.2x), PEG 0.46 vs 1.68
Among these 5 stocks, SGRY doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
ENSG is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Dividend streak 12 yrs, beta 0.42, yield 0.1%
- 7.5% 10Y total return vs UHS's 30.8%
- 18.7% revenue growth vs ACHC's 5.0%
- Beta 0.42 vs LFST's 1.20
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 18.7% revenue growth vs ACHC's 5.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.3x vs 23.2x), PEG 0.46 vs 1.68 | |
| Quality / Margins | 8.6% margin vs ACHC's -32.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.42 vs LFST's 1.20 | |
| Dividends | 0.5% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs ENSG's 0.1%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +60.6% vs SGRY's -38.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 9.8% ROA vs ACHC's -18.6%, ROIC 12.3% vs 5.9% |
LFST vs ACHC vs UHS vs SGRY vs ENSG — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
LFST vs ACHC vs UHS vs SGRY vs ENSG — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
SGRY leads in 1 of 6 categories
ENSG leads 1 • LFST leads 0 • ACHC leads 0 • UHS leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — LFST and UHS each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
UHS is the larger business by revenue, generating $17.8B annually — 11.9x LFST's $1.5B. UHS is the more profitable business, keeping 8.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ACHC's -32.8%. On growth, LFST holds the edge at +21.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.5B | $3.4B | $17.8B | $3.3B | $5.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $100M | $588M | $2.7B | $572M | $558M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $23M | -$1.1B | $1.5B | -$76M | $363M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $179M | -$215M | $894M | $208M | $406M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +21.7% | +56.2% | +67.6% | +22.8% | +15.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +3.0% | +11.7% | +11.5% | +11.8% | +8.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +1.6% | -32.8% | +8.6% | -2.3% | +6.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +12.0% | -6.4% | +5.0% | +6.2% | +7.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +21.2% | +7.6% | +9.6% | +4.5% | +18.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -49.8% | +17.7% | +6.7% | +21.9% |
Valuation Metrics
SGRY leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 7.4x trailing earnings, UHS trades at a 98% valuation discount to LFST's 442.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), UHS offers better value at 0.46x vs ENSG's 2.16x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $3.4B | $2.3B | $10.7B | $1.9B | $10.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $3.4B | $4.8B | $16.0B | $5.7B | $13.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 442.50x | -2.01x | 7.38x | -23.46x | 29.85x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 121.07x | 16.42x | 7.30x | 37.99x | 23.19x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.46x | — | 2.16x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 41.98x | 8.27x | 6.14x | 10.00x | 25.71x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.41x | 0.68x | 0.61x | 0.57x | 2.01x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.28x | 1.04x | 1.48x | 0.52x | 4.59x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 31.20x | — | 12.57x | 9.57x | 27.46x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — LFST and UHS each lead in 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
UHS delivers a 20.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $21 in annual profit, vs $-41 for ACHC. LFST carries lower financial leverage with a 0.13x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to ENSG's 1.86x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), LFST scores 7/9 vs ENSG's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +1.6% | -40.9% | +20.7% | -2.2% | +16.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +1.1% | -18.6% | +9.8% | -0.9% | +6.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +1.2% | +5.9% | +12.3% | +4.1% | +7.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +1.3% | +7.5% | +16.0% | +5.2% | +10.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.13x | 1.24x | 0.74x | 1.14x | 1.86x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$55M | $2.5B | $5.4B | $3.8B | $3.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $249M | $133M | $138M | $240M | $504M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $194M | $2.7B | $5.5B | $4.0B | $4.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 3.30x | -5.99x | 10.92x | 1.35x | 88.33x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
ENSG leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ENSG five years ago would be worth $20,324 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,773 for SGRY. Over the past 12 months, LFST leads with a +60.6% total return vs SGRY's -38.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ENSG at 23.6% vs ACHC's -29.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +27.2% | +71.2% | -22.3% | -6.2% | +0.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +60.6% | +1.2% | -8.2% | -38.2% | +27.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +4.1% | -64.5% | +20.8% | -59.2% | +88.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -59.6% | -61.8% | +12.5% | -72.3% | +103.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -59.6% | -58.5% | +30.8% | -0.6% | +752.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +1.4% | -29.2% | +6.5% | -25.8% | +23.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — LFST and ENSG each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ENSG is the less volatile stock with a 0.42 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LFST's 1.20 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. LFST currently trades 99.6% from its 52-week high vs SGRY's 59.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.20x | 0.84x | 0.60x | 1.04x | 0.42x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $8.89 | $30.20 | $246.33 | $24.18 | $218.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $3.74 | $11.43 | $152.33 | $11.41 | $133.81 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +99.6% | +81.0% | +69.2% | +59.2% | +80.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 60.4 | 46.2 | 39.7 | 63.3 | 23.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.9M | 3.1M | 793K | 1.5M | 358K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — UHS and ENSG each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LFST as "Buy", ACHC as "Buy", UHS as "Hold", SGRY as "Buy", ENSG as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 35.7% upside for UHS (target: $232) vs -3.9% for ACHC (target: $24). For income investors, UHS offers the higher dividend yield at 0.47% vs ENSG's 0.14%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $9.30 | $23.50 | $231.50 | $18.60 | $222.33 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 11 | 25 | 43 | 22 | 13 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.5% | — | +0.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 1 | 1 | 0 | 12 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $0.80 | — | $0.24 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +2.2% | +9.1% | 0.0% | +0.2% |
SGRY leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). ENSG leads in 1 (Total Returns). 4 tied.
LFST vs ACHC vs UHS vs SGRY vs ENSG: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LFST or ACHC or UHS or SGRY or ENSG a better buy right now?
For growth investors, The Ensign Group, Inc.
(ENSG) is the stronger pick with 18. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 0% for Acadia Healthcare Company, Inc. (ACHC). 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 LifeStance Health Group, Inc. (LFST) a "Buy" — based on 11 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 — LFST or ACHC or UHS or SGRY or ENSG?
On trailing P/E, Universal Health Services, Inc.
(UHS) is the cheapest at 7. 4x versus LifeStance Health Group, Inc. at 442. 5x. 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 Ensign Group, Inc. 's 1. 68x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LFST or ACHC or UHS or SGRY or ENSG?
Over the past 5 years, The Ensign Group, Inc.
(ENSG) delivered a total return of +103. 2%, compared to -72. 3% for Surgery Partners, Inc. (SGRY). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ENSG returned +752. 0% versus LFST's -59. 6%. 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 — LFST or ACHC or UHS or SGRY or ENSG?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Ensign Group, Inc.
(ENSG) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 42β versus LifeStance Health Group, Inc. 's 1. 20β — meaning LFST is approximately 183% more volatile than ENSG relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, LifeStance Health Group, Inc. (LFST) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 13% versus 186% for The Ensign Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LFST or ACHC or UHS or SGRY or ENSG?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), The Ensign Group, Inc.
(ENSG) is pulling ahead at 18. 7% versus 5. 0% for Acadia Healthcare Company, Inc. (ACHC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: LifeStance Health Group, Inc. grew EPS 113. 3% year-over-year, compared to -537. 4% for Acadia Healthcare Company, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ENSG leads at 18. 7% 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 — LFST or ACHC or UHS or SGRY or ENSG?
Universal Health Services, Inc.
(UHS) is the more profitable company, earning 8. 6% net margin versus -33. 3% for Acadia Healthcare Company, Inc. — meaning it keeps 8. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: SGRY leads at 11. 8% versus 1. 8% for LFST. 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.
07Is LFST or ACHC or UHS or SGRY or ENSG 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, Universal Health Services, Inc. (UHS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 46x versus The Ensign Group, Inc. 's 1. 68x. 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 121. 1x for LifeStance Health Group, Inc. — 113. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for UHS: 35. 7% to $231. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — LFST or ACHC or UHS or SGRY or ENSG?
In this comparison, UHS (0.
5% yield), ENSG (0. 1% yield) pay a dividend. LFST, ACHC, SGRY do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is LFST or ACHC or UHS or SGRY or ENSG better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Ensign Group, Inc.
(ENSG) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 42), +752. 0% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ENSG: +752. 0%, LFST: -59. 6%), 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 LFST and ACHC and UHS and SGRY and ENSG?
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: LFST is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ACHC is a small-cap quality compounder stock; UHS is a mid-cap deep-value stock; SGRY is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ENSG is a mid-cap high-growth stock. 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.