Medical - Distribution
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
RDGT vs CAH vs MCK vs HSIC vs OMI
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Distribution
Medical - Distribution
Medical - Distribution
Medical - Distribution
RDGT vs CAH vs MCK vs HSIC vs OMI — 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 | $382.00 | $43.59B | $92.15B | $8.09B | $171M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $259M | $250.55B | $403.43B | $13.18B | $2.76B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $7M | $1.56B | $4.76B | $398M | $-1.10B |
| Gross Margin | 8.3% | 3.7% | 3.6% | 29.1% | — |
| Operating Margin | -1.8% | 0.9% | 1.5% | 5.8% | 1.0% |
| Forward P/E | — | 17.1x | 16.7x | 13.2x | 2.3x |
| Total Debt | $10M | $9.35B | $7.39B | $3.69B | $320M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $13M | $3.87B | $5.69B | $156M | $282M |
RDGT vs CAH vs MCK vs HSIC vs OMI — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ridgetech Inc. (RDGT) | 100 | 0.0 | -100.0% |
| Cardinal Health, In… (CAH) | 100 | 335.8 | +235.8% |
| McKesson Corporation (MCK) | 100 | 464.2 | +364.2% |
| Henry Schein, Inc. (HSIC) | 100 | 116.6 | +16.6% |
| Owens & Minor, Inc. (OMI) | 100 | 27.9 | -72.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: RDGT vs CAH vs MCK vs HSIC vs OMI
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
RDGT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.10, Low D/E 35.0%, current ratio 1.74x
- 8.7% ROA vs OMI's -44.9%, ROIC -2.4% vs 1.8%
CAH carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 20 yrs, beta 0.03, yield 1.1%
- Beta 0.03, yield 1.1%, current ratio 0.94x
- Beta 0.03 vs OMI's 1.44
- 1.1% yield, 20-year raise streak, vs MCK's 0.4%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
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 0.43 vs HSIC's 4.20
- 16.2% revenue growth vs OMI's -74.2%
HSIC is the clearest fit if your priority is quality.
- 3.0% margin vs OMI's -39.8%
Among these 5 stocks, OMI doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 16.2% revenue growth vs OMI's -74.2% | |
| Value | PEG 0.43 vs 4.20 | |
| 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%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +22.0% vs RDGT's -99.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 8.7% ROA vs OMI's -44.9%, ROIC -2.4% vs 1.8% |
RDGT vs CAH vs MCK vs HSIC vs OMI — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
RDGT vs CAH vs MCK vs HSIC vs OMI — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
RDGT leads in 2 of 6 categories
CAH leads 2 • HSIC leads 1 • MCK leads 0 • OMI 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 — 1559.2x RDGT's $259M. 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 | $259M | $250.5B | $403.4B | $13.2B | $2.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $2M | $3.2B | $6.8B | $1.1B | $277M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $7M | $1.6B | $4.8B | $398M | -$1.1B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$10M | $4.4B | $6.0B | $561M | -$353M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +8.3% | +3.7% | +3.6% | +29.1% | — |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -1.8% | +0.9% | +1.5% | +5.8% | +1.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +2.6% | +0.6% | +1.2% | +3.0% | -39.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -3.7% | +1.8% | +1.5% | +4.3% | -12.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -11.7% | +11.0% | +6.0% | +7.7% | -146.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +97.5% | -19.5% | +37.0% | +14.9% | +4.5% |
Valuation Metrics
RDGT leads this category, winning 4 of 7 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 | $382 | $43.6B | $92.1B | $8.1B | $171M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | -$2M | $49.1B | $93.8B | $11.6B | $209M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 0.00x | 28.72x | 29.25x | 21.56x | -0.16x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 17.09x | 16.66x | 13.25x | 2.31x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.75x | 6.84x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | -0.48x | 16.01x | 18.74x | 10.87x | 1.70x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.00x | 0.20x | 0.26x | 0.61x | 0.06x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.00x | — | — | 1.79x | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 0.00x | 23.56x | 17.63x | 14.12x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
RDGT 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. RDGT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.35x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to HSIC's 0.77x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), RDGT scores 6/9 vs OMI's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +29.1% | — | +3.0% | +8.2% | -21.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +8.7% | +2.8% | +5.7% | +3.6% | -44.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -2.4% | +33.8% | +5.4% | +7.1% | +1.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -4.1% | +19.2% | +30.5% | +9.8% | +1.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 2 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.35x | — | — | 0.77x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$2M | $5.5B | $1.7B | $3.5B | $38M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $13M | $3.9B | $5.7B | $156M | $282M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $10M | $9.3B | $7.4B | $3.7B | $320M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 6.38x | 33.79x | 4.59x | -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 $0 for RDGT. Over the past 12 months, CAH leads with a +22.0% total return vs RDGT's -99.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CAH at 31.5% vs RDGT's -91.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -99.6% | -9.5% | -8.5% | -8.2% | -3.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -99.1% | +22.0% | +4.6% | +5.9% | -71.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.9% | +127.3% | +106.4% | -11.7% | -87.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | +235.7% | +286.9% | -12.5% | -93.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | +160.8% | +348.1% | +5.3% | -86.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -91.6% | +31.5% | +27.3% | -4.0% | -49.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CAH and MCK each lead in 1 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 RDGT's 0.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.27x | 0.01x | -0.02x | 0.72x | 1.45x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $760.50 | $233.60 | $999.00 | $89.29 | $9.55 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.23 | $137.75 | $637.00 | $61.95 | $1.84 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +0.2% | +79.3% | +75.3% | +79.0% | +23.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 32.8 | 33.2 | 16.2 | 39.1 | 46.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 59.4M | 1.7M | 757K | 1.2M | 690K |
Analyst Outlook
CAH leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CAH as "Buy", MCK as "Buy", HSIC as "Hold", OMI as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 596.4% upside for OMI (target: $16) vs 21.2% for HSIC (target: $85). 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 | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $253.38 | $994.86 | $85.43 | $15.60 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 33 | 31 | 32 | 10 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.1% | +0.4% | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 20 | 17 | 1 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $2.04 | $2.69 | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.8% | +3.4% | +10.5% | 0.0% |
RDGT leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). CAH leads in 2 (Total Returns, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
RDGT vs CAH vs MCK vs HSIC vs OMI: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is RDGT or CAH or MCK or HSIC 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. 2x 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 — RDGT or CAH or MCK or HSIC 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. 43x versus Henry Schein, Inc. 's 4. 20x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — RDGT or CAH or MCK or HSIC or OMI?
Over the past 5 years, McKesson Corporation (MCK) delivered a total return of +286.
9%, compared to -100. 0% for Ridgetech Inc. (RDGT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MCK returned +339. 0% versus RDGT's -100. 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 — RDGT or CAH or MCK or HSIC or OMI?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), McKesson Corporation (MCK) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
02β versus Owens & Minor, Inc. 's 1. 45β — meaning OMI is approximately -8947% more volatile than MCK relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Ridgetech Inc. (RDGT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 35% versus 77% for Henry Schein, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — RDGT or CAH or MCK or HSIC 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: Ridgetech Inc. grew EPS 162. 8% 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 — RDGT or CAH or MCK or HSIC or OMI?
Ridgetech Inc.
(RDGT) is the more profitable company, earning 8. 5% net margin versus -39. 8% for Owens & Minor, Inc. — meaning it keeps 8. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HSIC leads at 5. 7% versus -0. 9% for RDGT. 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 RDGT or CAH or MCK or HSIC 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. 43x versus Henry Schein, Inc. 's 4. 20x. 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 17. 1x for Cardinal Health, Inc. — 14. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for OMI: 596. 4% to $15. 60.
08Which pays a better dividend — RDGT or CAH or MCK or HSIC or OMI?
In this comparison, CAH (1.
1% yield), MCK (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. RDGT, HSIC, OMI do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is RDGT or CAH or MCK or HSIC 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. 01), 1. 1% yield, +158. 8% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CAH: +158. 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 RDGT and CAH and MCK and HSIC 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: RDGT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CAH is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; MCK is a mid-cap high-growth stock; HSIC is a small-cap quality compounder stock; OMI is a small-cap quality compounder stock. CAH pays a dividend while RDGT, MCK, HSIC, 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.