Medical - Care Facilities
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
TOI vs MCK vs CAH vs AIOT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Distribution
Medical - Distribution
Communication Equipment
TOI vs MCK vs CAH vs AIOT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Care Facilities | Medical - Distribution | Medical - Distribution | Communication Equipment |
| Market Cap | $5.41B | $94.25B | $52.68B | $574M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $546M | $403.43B | $250.55B | $436M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-44M | $4.76B | $1.56B | $-32M |
| Gross Margin | 14.8% | 3.6% | 3.7% | 55.2% |
| Operating Margin | -6.0% | 1.6% | 0.9% | 1.7% |
| Forward P/E | — | 17.7x | 20.8x | — |
| Total Debt | $104M | $8.61B | $9.35B | $287M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $34M | $3.98B | $3.87B | $49M |
TOI vs MCK vs CAH vs AIOT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 24 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Oncology Instit… (TOI) | 100 | 1154.3 | +1054.3% |
| McKesson Corporation (MCK) | 100 | 134.2 | +34.2% |
| Cardinal Health, In… (CAH) | 100 | 227.7 | +127.7% |
| PowerFleet, Inc. (AIOT) | 100 | 92.3 | -7.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TOI vs MCK vs CAH vs AIOT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TOI is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.95, current ratio 1.59x
- Beta 1.95 vs AIOT's 2.71
- +100.4% vs AIOT's -11.0%
MCK carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding.
- 337.8% 10Y total return vs CAH's 211.1%
- Better valuation composite
- 1.2% margin vs TOI's -8.0%
- 5.7% ROA vs TOI's -26.5%, ROIC 254.1% vs -41.2%
CAH lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
AIOT is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 2.71, yield 17.8%
- Rev growth 66.3%, EPS growth 60.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 42.2%
- Beta 2.71, yield 17.8%, current ratio 1.12x
- 66.3% revenue growth vs CAH's -1.9%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 66.3% revenue growth vs CAH's -1.9% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 1.2% margin vs TOI's -8.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.95 vs AIOT's 2.71 | |
| Dividends | 17.8% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs CAH's 0.9%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +100.4% vs AIOT's -11.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 5.7% ROA vs TOI's -26.5%, ROIC 254.1% vs -41.2% |
TOI vs MCK vs CAH vs AIOT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
TOI vs MCK vs CAH vs AIOT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MCK leads in 2 of 6 categories
AIOT leads 1 • TOI leads 1 • CAH leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AIOT leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MCK is the larger business by revenue, generating $403.4B annually — 925.9x AIOT's $436M. MCK is the more profitable business, keeping 1.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to TOI's -8.0%. On growth, AIOT holds the edge at +47.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $546M | $403.4B | $250.5B | $436M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$26M | $7.1B | $3.2B | $69M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$44M | $4.8B | $1.6B | -$32M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$26M | $5.9B | $4.4B | $3M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +14.8% | +3.6% | +3.7% | +55.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -6.0% | +1.6% | +0.9% | +1.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -8.0% | +1.2% | +0.6% | -7.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -4.7% | +1.5% | +1.8% | +0.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +41.2% | +6.0% | +11.0% | +47.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +90.5% | +37.0% | -19.5% | -25.5% |
Valuation Metrics
MCK leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 20.4x trailing earnings, MCK trades at a 41% valuation discount to CAH's 34.7x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, MCK's 13.8x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than AIOT's 51.2x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $5.4B | $94.2B | $52.7B | $574M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $5.5B | $98.9B | $58.1B | $813M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -9.83x | 20.43x | 34.71x | -9.81x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 17.72x | 20.79x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 13.77x | 18.97x | 51.19x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 10.75x | 0.23x | 0.24x | 1.58x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | — | — | 1.13x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 16.48x | 28.47x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
MCK leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MCK scores 7/9 vs AIOT's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | — | — | -6.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -26.5% | +5.7% | +2.8% | -3.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -41.2% | +2.5% | +33.8% | -4.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -33.7% | +44.8% | +19.2% | -5.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 7 | 6 | 3 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | — | — | 0.64x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $70M | $4.6B | $5.5B | $238M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $34M | $4.0B | $3.9B | $49M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $104M | $8.6B | $9.3B | $287M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -4.96x | 51.78x | 6.38x | 0.47x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
TOI leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MCK five years ago would be worth $41,299 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $5,257 for TOI. Over the past 12 months, TOI leads with a +100.4% total return vs AIOT's -11.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors TOI at 111.1% vs AIOT's -4.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +44.7% | -4.6% | +9.3% | -19.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +100.4% | +7.7% | +40.7% | -11.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +841.3% | +100.5% | +163.7% | -11.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -47.4% | +313.0% | +300.9% | -11.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -45.3% | +337.8% | +211.1% | -11.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +111.1% | +26.1% | +38.2% | -4.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MCK and CAH each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MCK is the less volatile stock with a -0.10 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than AIOT's 2.71 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CAH currently trades 95.8% from its 52-week high vs AIOT's 71.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.95x | -0.10x | -0.07x | 2.71x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $5.58 | $999.00 | $233.60 | $5.88 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.02 | $637.00 | $137.75 | $2.77 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +95.2% | +78.5% | +95.8% | +71.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 65.3 | 55.5 | 74.4 | 65.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.6M | 879K | 1.9M | 1.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — CAH and AIOT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TOI as "Buy", MCK as "Buy", CAH as "Buy", AIOT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 89.6% upside for AIOT (target: $8) vs 13.2% for CAH (target: $253). For income investors, AIOT offers the higher dividend yield at 17.85% vs MCK's 0.39%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $8.00 | $994.86 | $253.38 | $8.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 5 | 31 | 33 | 5 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.4% | +0.9% | +17.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 18 | 40 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $3.07 | $2.04 | $0.75 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +5.0% | +1.5% | +0.5% |
MCK leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). AIOT leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.
TOI vs MCK vs CAH vs AIOT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TOI or MCK or CAH or AIOT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, The Oncology Institute, Inc.
(TOI) is the stronger pick with 27. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -1. 9% for Cardinal Health, Inc. (CAH). McKesson Corporation (MCK) offers the better valuation at 20. 4x trailing P/E (17. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate The Oncology Institute, Inc. (TOI) 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 — TOI or MCK or CAH or AIOT?
On trailing P/E, McKesson Corporation (MCK) is the cheapest at 20.
4x versus Cardinal Health, Inc. at 34. 7x. On forward P/E, McKesson Corporation is actually cheaper at 17. 7x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TOI or MCK or CAH or AIOT?
Over the past 5 years, McKesson Corporation (MCK) delivered a total return of +313.
0%, compared to -47. 4% for The Oncology Institute, Inc. (TOI). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MCK returned +337. 8% versus TOI's -45. 3%. 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 — TOI or MCK or CAH or AIOT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), McKesson Corporation (MCK) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
10β versus PowerFleet, Inc. 's 2. 71β — meaning AIOT is approximately -2739% more volatile than MCK relative to the S&P 500.
05Which is growing faster — TOI or MCK or CAH or AIOT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), The Oncology Institute, Inc.
(TOI) is pulling ahead at 27. 8% versus -1. 9% for Cardinal Health, Inc. (CAH). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Cardinal Health, Inc. grew EPS 87. 0% year-over-year, compared to 23. 9% for The Oncology Institute, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, AIOT leads at 42. 2% 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 — TOI or MCK or CAH or AIOT?
McKesson Corporation (MCK) is the more profitable company, earning 1.
2% net margin versus -14. 1% for PowerFleet, Inc. — meaning it keeps 1. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MCK leads at 1. 6% versus -7. 2% for TOI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AIOT leads at 53. 7%, 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 TOI or MCK or CAH or AIOT more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, McKesson Corporation (MCK) trades at 17.
7x forward P/E versus 20. 8x for Cardinal Health, Inc. — 3. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for AIOT: 89. 6% to $8. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — TOI or MCK or CAH or AIOT?
In this comparison, AIOT (17.
8% yield), CAH (0. 9% yield), MCK (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. TOI does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is TOI or MCK or CAH or AIOT 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. 07), 0. 9% yield, +211. 1% 10Y return). The Oncology Institute, Inc. (TOI) carries a higher beta of 1. 95 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CAH: +211. 1%, TOI: -45. 3%), 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 TOI and MCK and CAH and AIOT?
These companies operate in different sectors (TOI (Healthcare) and MCK (Healthcare) and CAH (Healthcare) and AIOT (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: TOI is a small-cap high-growth stock; MCK is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; CAH is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; AIOT is a small-cap income-oriented stock. CAH, AIOT pay a dividend while TOI, MCK 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.