Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to Medpace Holdings, Inc.
How Medpace Holdings, Inc. stacks up
MEDP · against 115 other Healthcare companies of similar size
Valuation
51/ 100
Below the middle of the pack.
Ranked #72 of 116 · scores higher than 36% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score18 peers with a valuation score of 50–59, including MEDP · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 51?
Weighted metrics compared with all Healthcare companies.Its metrics sit close to the Healthcare norm.
- EBITDA yield is close to the peer norm. EBITDA yield: 3.4% vs peer median 4.0%
- Earnings yield is close to the peer norm. Earnings yield: 2.7% vs peer median 1.5%
- more free cash flow for the price paid: stronger than 72% of peers. Free cash flow yield: 3.8% vs peer median 0.0%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = MEDP, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | MEDP | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 114 reported | 2.6% | 3.2% | 41% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 116 reported | 3.4% | 5.6% | 29% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 75 reported | 3.8% | 3.8% | 50% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 110 reported | 2.3% | 21.6% | 6% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around MEDP| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 89.5B HKD (≈$11.5B) | 98 | 67 | |
| 2 | 10.4B USD | 96 | 64 | |
| 3 | 80.2B CNY (≈$11.2B) | 95 | 76 | |
| 3 | 21.5B USD | 95 | 60 | |
| 5 | 11.6B USD | 94 | 58 | |
| 68 | 14.6B USD | 53 | 59 | |
| 70 | 10.0B USD | 52 | 43 | |
| 70 | 21.7B USD | 52 | 32 | |
| 72 | 34.6B USD | 51 | 58 | |
| 72 | 18.5B USD | 51 | 62 | |
| 72 | 34.0B USD | 51 | 49 | |
| 72 | 11.9B USD | 51 | 53 | |
| 76 | 36.0B USD | 50 | 46 | |
| 77 | 10.8B USD | 49 | 35 |
Scores are sector-relative percentiles from the latest snapshot, always calculated against the whole sector: narrowing the comparison group changes who you compare with, not the scores. Missing metrics are left out and the remaining weights rescaled. How we score