Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. COR scored 62.1, MCK scored 74.2 — MCK leads.
Compare another set
COR
Cencora, Inc.
Medical Distribution · Quality-Growth
62.1
$323.85 · $61.8B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
12.1
MCK leads
MCK
McKesson Corporation
Medical Distribution · Quality-Growth
74.2
$938.84 · $109.5B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestCOR24.0x
Fastest growthMCK+12.4%
Highest qualityMCK81 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueCOR-41%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
COR
stronger →← stronger
MCK
69
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
81
73
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
82
48
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
62
MCK is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
COR
MCK
$4.1bB
FCF
$6.1bB+
+9.3%B
Rev
+12.4%B+
4.47D
D/E
Negative equity
24.0xB+
P/E
25.2xB
0.67A-
PEG
1.75C+
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
COR
MCK
41% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
1% below
~-5%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~8%/yr
+55%
1-yr DCF upside
-10%
+70%
5-yr DCF upside
+1%
+95%
10-yr DCF upside
+18%
These two disagree on this pair: the Value pillar ranks cheapness against sector peers, while price-vs-fair-value is an absolute read. A name can be the better value in its sector and still the dearer one on cash flows.
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
COR
Why this score
Raising its dividend
Durable high returns
MCK
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
Durable high returns
The companies
CORCencora, Inc.
Medical Distribution · $323.85 · beta 0.58
Why now
Medical Distribution · market cap $61.8b. 14% off the 52-week high of $377.54. PEG 0.67 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 12 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $369.92 (implying +14% upside).
Moat
ROE 97% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 155% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash. $61.8b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
Risk
D/E 4.47 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Net margin 0.8% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
MCKMcKesson Corporation
Medical Distribution · $938.84 · beta 0.30
Why now
Medical Distribution · market cap $109.5b. 6% off the 52-week high of $999.00. Revenue growing +12%, comfortably above the S&P median. 12 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $980.67 (implying +4% upside).
Moat
FCF converts 134% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash. $109.5b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
Risk
Net margin 1.1% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
MCK leads COR by 3.9 points (70.1 to 66.2), its sharpest advantage coming in Rev (grade B). A contrarian could still prefer COR, which trades about 44% below our DCF fair value — a margin of safety the score doesn't reward. Note they play different roles — COR screens as value, MCK screens as growth — so the model rewards different traits for each.
Our AI analyst is busy right now, so this verdict is drawn directly from the pillars, grades and DCF above.
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where COR and MCK diverge
On the headline score the gap is 12.1 points in favor of MCK. The widest single difference is Value, where MCK leads by 13.8 points.
ValueCOR 47.8 · MCK 61.6MCK +13.8
QualityCOR 68.7 · MCK 81.2MCK +12.5
GrowthCOR 72.8 · MCK 81.7MCK +8.9
Pillars run 0–100. Value is judged against each company's own sector, so a Value score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.
Common questions
Is MCK or COR the better stock?
MCK scores higher: MCK 74.2, COR 62.1 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
Where do MCK and COR differ most?
The widest gap is value, where MCK leads by 14 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. MCK leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are MCK and COR scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.