Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
VYNE vs GDRX vs MCK vs CAH vs HSIC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Healthcare Information Services
Medical - Distribution
Medical - Distribution
Medical - Distribution
VYNE vs GDRX vs MCK vs CAH vs HSIC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Medical - Healthcare Information Services | Medical - Distribution | Medical - Distribution | Medical - Distribution |
| Market Cap | $29M | $973M | $92.15B | $43.59B | $8.09B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $570K | $788M | $403.43B | $250.55B | $13.18B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-26M | $29M | $4.76B | $1.56B | $398M |
| Gross Margin | 99.1% | 81.0% | 3.6% | 3.7% | 29.1% |
| Operating Margin | -52.2% | 12.4% | 1.5% | 0.9% | 5.8% |
| Forward P/E | — | 9.0x | 19.3x | 17.9x | 13.3x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $60M | $7.39B | $9.35B | $3.69B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $24M | $262M | $5.69B | $3.87B | $156M |
VYNE vs GDRX vs MCK vs CAH vs HSIC — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Sep 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| VYNE Therapeutics I… (VYNE) | 100 | 0.6 | -99.4% |
| GoodRx Holdings, In… (GDRX) | 100 | 5.1 | -94.9% |
| McKesson Corporation (MCK) | 100 | 505.1 | +405.1% |
| Cardinal Health, In… (CAH) | 100 | 394.5 | +294.5% |
| Henry Schein, Inc. (HSIC) | 100 | 119.9 | +19.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: VYNE vs GDRX vs MCK vs CAH vs HSIC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
VYNE lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
GDRX is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if value and quality is your priority.
- Lower P/E (9.0x vs 13.3x)
- 3.7% margin vs VYNE's -46.5%
MCK ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- 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 CAH's -1.9%
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 GDRX's 1.58
Among these 5 stocks, HSIC doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 16.2% revenue growth vs CAH's -1.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (9.0x vs 13.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 3.7% margin vs VYNE's -46.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.03 vs GDRX's 1.58 | |
| Dividends | 1.1% yield, 20-year raise streak, vs MCK's 0.4%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +22.0% vs VYNE's -50.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 5.7% ROA vs VYNE's -63.3%, ROIC 5.4% vs -124.0% |
VYNE vs GDRX vs MCK vs CAH vs HSIC — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
VYNE vs GDRX vs MCK vs CAH vs HSIC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CAH leads in 3 of 6 categories
GDRX leads 1 • MCK leads 1 • VYNE leads 0 • HSIC leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — VYNE and GDRX each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MCK is the larger business by revenue, generating $403.4B annually — 707771.9x VYNE's $570,000. GDRX is the more profitable business, keeping 3.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to VYNE's -46.5%. On growth, VYNE holds the edge at +54.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $570,000 | $788M | $403.4B | $250.5B | $13.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$30M | $184M | $6.8B | $3.2B | $1.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$26M | $29M | $4.8B | $1.6B | $398M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$33M | $132M | $6.0B | $4.4B | $561M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +99.1% | +81.0% | +3.6% | +3.7% | +29.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -52.2% | +12.4% | +1.5% | +0.9% | +5.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -46.5% | +3.7% | +1.2% | +0.6% | +3.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -58.1% | +16.7% | +1.5% | +1.8% | +4.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +54.8% | -4.4% | +6.0% | +11.0% | +7.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +57.1% | -1.3% | +37.0% | -19.5% | +14.9% |
Valuation Metrics
GDRX leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 21.6x trailing earnings, HSIC trades at a 35% valuation discount to GDRX's 33.3x 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 | $29M | $973M | $92.1B | $43.6B | $8.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $5M | $771M | $93.8B | $49.1B | $11.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -1.09x | 33.29x | 29.25x | 28.72x | 21.56x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 8.98x | 19.28x | 17.94x | 13.26x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.75x | — | 6.84x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 4.01x | 18.74x | 16.01x | 10.87x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 50.53x | 1.22x | 0.26x | 0.20x | 0.61x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.04x | 1.65x | — | — | 1.79x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 5.92x | 17.63x | 23.56x | 14.12x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MCK 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 $-74 for VYNE. GDRX carries lower financial leverage with a 0.10x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to HSIC's 0.77x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), GDRX scores 6/9 vs VYNE's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -74.1% | +4.8% | +3.0% | — | +8.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -63.3% | +1.9% | +5.7% | +2.8% | +3.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -124.0% | +13.0% | +5.4% | +33.8% | +7.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -74.5% | +8.8% | +30.5% | +19.2% | +9.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.10x | — | — | 0.77x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$24M | -$202M | $1.7B | $5.5B | $3.5B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $24M | $262M | $5.7B | $3.9B | $156M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $60M | $7.4B | $9.3B | $3.7B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 3.61x | 33.79x | 6.38x | 4.59x |
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 $103 for VYNE. Over the past 12 months, CAH leads with a +22.0% total return vs VYNE's -50.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CAH at 31.5% vs VYNE's -57.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +16.1% | +3.3% | -8.5% | -9.5% | -8.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -50.8% | -25.1% | +4.6% | +22.0% | +5.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -92.2% | -38.4% | +106.4% | +127.3% | -11.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.0% | -91.8% | +286.9% | +235.7% | -12.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -94.4% | +348.1% | +160.8% | +5.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -57.3% | -14.9% | +27.3% | +31.5% | -4.0% |
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 GDRX's 1.58 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 VYNE's 34.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.74x | 1.58x | 0.04x | 0.03x | 0.73x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $1.96 | $5.81 | $999.00 | $233.60 | $89.29 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.28 | $1.77 | $637.00 | $137.75 | $61.95 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +34.4% | +48.9% | +75.3% | +79.3% | +79.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 68.7 | 66.1 | 16.2 | 33.2 | 39.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 192K | 2.3M | 757K | 1.7M | 1.2M |
Analyst Outlook
CAH leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: GDRX as "Hold", MCK as "Buy", CAH as "Buy", HSIC as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 34.8% upside for CAH (target: $250) vs 12.3% for GDRX (target: $3). 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 | — | $3.19 | $1006.50 | $249.67 | $86.43 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 24 | 31 | 33 | 32 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.4% | +1.1% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 1 | 17 | 20 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $2.69 | $2.04 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +21.3% | +3.4% | +1.8% | +10.5% |
CAH leads in 3 of 6 categories (Total Returns, Risk & Volatility). GDRX leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
VYNE vs GDRX vs MCK vs CAH vs HSIC: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is VYNE or GDRX or MCK or CAH or HSIC a better buy right now?
For growth investors, McKesson Corporation (MCK) is the stronger pick with 16.
2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -1. 9% for Cardinal Health, Inc. (CAH). 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 McKesson Corporation (MCK) a "Buy" — based on 31 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 — VYNE or GDRX or MCK or CAH or HSIC?
On trailing P/E, Henry Schein, Inc.
(HSIC) is the cheapest at 21. 6x versus GoodRx Holdings, Inc. at 33. 3x. On forward P/E, GoodRx Holdings, Inc. is actually cheaper at 9. 0x — 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 — VYNE or GDRX or MCK or CAH or HSIC?
Over the past 5 years, McKesson Corporation (MCK) delivered a total return of +286.
9%, compared to -99. 0% for VYNE Therapeutics Inc. (VYNE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MCK returned +348. 1% versus VYNE'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 — VYNE or GDRX or MCK or CAH or HSIC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Cardinal Health, Inc.
(CAH) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 03β versus GoodRx Holdings, Inc. 's 1. 58β — meaning GDRX is approximately 4555% more volatile than CAH relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, GoodRx Holdings, Inc. (GDRX) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 10% versus 77% for Henry Schein, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — VYNE or GDRX or MCK or CAH or HSIC?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), McKesson Corporation (MCK) is pulling ahead at 16.
2% versus -1. 9% for Cardinal Health, Inc. (CAH). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: GoodRx Holdings, Inc. grew EPS 104. 1% year-over-year, compared to 7. 2% for Henry Schein, 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 — VYNE or GDRX or MCK or CAH or HSIC?
GoodRx Holdings, Inc.
(GDRX) is the more profitable company, earning 3. 8% net margin versus -46. 5% for VYNE Therapeutics Inc. — meaning it keeps 3. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GDRX leads at 13. 4% versus -52. 2% for VYNE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — VYNE leads at 96. 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 VYNE or GDRX or MCK or CAH or HSIC 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, GoodRx Holdings, Inc. (GDRX) trades at 9. 0x forward P/E versus 19. 3x for McKesson Corporation — 10. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CAH: 34. 8% to $249. 67.
08Which pays a better dividend — VYNE or GDRX or MCK or CAH or HSIC?
In this comparison, CAH (1.
1% yield), MCK (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. VYNE, GDRX, HSIC do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is VYNE or GDRX or MCK or CAH or HSIC 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). GoodRx Holdings, Inc. (GDRX) carries a higher beta of 1. 58 — 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: +160. 8%, GDRX: -94. 4%), 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 VYNE and GDRX and MCK and CAH and HSIC?
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: VYNE is a small-cap quality compounder stock; GDRX is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MCK is a mid-cap high-growth stock; CAH is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; HSIC is a small-cap quality compounder stock. CAH pays a dividend while VYNE, GDRX, MCK, HSIC 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.