Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to PACS Group, Inc.
How PACS Group, Inc. stacks up
PACS · against 201 other Healthcare companies of similar size
Valuation
58/ 100
Above the middle of the pack.
Ranked #85 of 202 · scores higher than 57% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the valuation score31 peers with a valuation score of 50–59, including PACS · Click a bar to see the companies
Why valuation scores 58?
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: 4.5% vs peer median 4.0%
- Free cash flow yield is close to the peer norm. Free cash flow yield: 1.6% vs peer median 0.0%
- higher earnings for the price paid: stronger than 68% of peers. Earnings yield: 3.6% vs peer median 1.5%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = PACS, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | PACS | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Earnings yieldHigher is better · 199 reported | 3.7% | 2.5% | 67% | 30% | |
| EBITDA yieldHigher is better · 201 reported | 4.5% | 4.6% | 49% | 50% | |
| Free cash flow yieldHigher is better · 120 reported | 1.6% | 1.2% | 55% | 20% | |
| Book yieldHigher is better · 200 reported | 15.0% | 22.6% | 36% | Context only |
Ranking by valuation score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around PACS| Rank | Company | Market cap | Valuation | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 52.2B HKD (≈$6.7B) | 99 | 56 | |
| 1 | 37.3B HKD (≈$4.8B) | 99 | 90 | |
| 3 | 89.5B HKD (≈$11.5B) | 98 | 67 | |
| 4 | 10.4B USD | 96 | 64 | |
| 5 | 80.2B CNY (≈$11.2B) | 95 | 76 | |
| 82 | 4.3B USD | 59 | 54 | |
| 82 | 3.8B USD | 59 | 71 | |
| 82 | 5.3B USD | 59 | 63 | |
| 85 | 35.1B CNY (≈$4.9B) | 58 | 56 | |
| 85 | 7.4B USD | 58 | 67 | |
| 85 | 12.6B USD | 58 | 55 | |
| 88 | 5.24T KRW (≈$3.8B) | 57 | 60 | |
| 88 | 8.4B USD | 57 | 67 | |
| 88 | 41.9B SEK (≈$4.2B) | 57 | 53 |
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