Head to head
Canadian Pacific Railway vs Union Pacific
Side-by-side on the measures that matter, with a plain-English read. Full detail: CP · UNP
CP
Canadian Pacific Railway
83.63-2.11%
1-year price shape — +9% over the period
Quant Rating D · 51/100
vs
UNP
Union Pacific
274.68-0.70%
1-year price shape — +21% over the period
Quant Rating C · 60/100
1-year performance, rebased to 100
Union Pacific edges it on the scoreable measures. Union Pacific has the highest Quant Rating (60); Union Pacific has done best over the past year (+21%); Union Pacific trades cheapest on trailing earnings.
| CP | UNP | |
|---|---|---|
| Snapshot | ||
| Sector | -- | -- |
| Last price | 83.63 | 274.68 |
| Change today | -2.11% | -0.70% |
| 1-year return | +9.0% | +21.0% |
| Market cap | $73.52B | $163.18B |
| 52-week range | 67.24 – 96.47 | 211.08 – 314.53 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E (TTM) | 27.73 | 22.24 |
| P/E percentile, own 5-yr range | 77th | 81st |
| P/B | 2.25 | 7.89 |
| Dividend yield | 0.80% | 2.01% |
| Profitability & growth | ||
| EPS (TTM) | 3.16 | 11.98 |
| Net profit (TTM) | $2.78B | $7.12B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $15.45B | $25.41B |
| Revenue growth (YoY) | +12.6% | +11.5% |
| Gross margin | 36.8% | 45.6% |
| Operating margin | 36.8% | 40.0% |
| Net margin | 25.0% | 28.8% |
| Free cash flow (TTM) | $2.40B | $6.50B |
| Ownership & sentiment | ||
| Institutional ownership | 73.7% | 90.7% |
| Insider activity (12mo) | 0 buy / 5 sell | 47 buy / 3 sell |
| Short interest (% of float) | 2.3% | 4.6% |
| Analyst consensus | 76% buy / 24% hold (17) | 83% buy / 17% hold (18) |
| Analyst price target | $101 (+21%) | $337 (+23%) |
| StockVane view | ||
| StockVane Quant Rating | D (51) | C (60) |
| Company | ||
| Employees | 19,502 | 29,287 |
| Founded | 2001 | 1862 |
▲ marks the more favourable stock(s) on measures with a clear direction (lower P/E, higher yield, higher Quant Rating, better 1-year return). Analyst consensus counts each covering institution once, at its most recent rating. Not a recommendation. Quant Rating method: Data & Methodology.