Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. OSCR scored 87.6, ALHC scored 69.7 — OSCR leads.
Compare another set
OSCR
Oscar Health, Inc.
Healthcare Plans · Quality-Growth
87.6
$33.37 · $10.3B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
17.9
OSCR leads
ALHC
Alignment Healthcare, Inc.
Healthcare Plans · Quality-Growth
69.7
$7.54 · $1.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestOSCR25.9x
Fastest growthALHC+46.1%
Strongest balance sheetOSCR0.23
Highest qualityOSCR80 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueOSCR-83%
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)
OSCR
stronger →← stronger
ALHC
80
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
46
95
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
98
88
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
76
OSCR is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
OSCR
ALHC
$4.4bB
FCF
$178mC
+27.5%A-
Rev
+46.1%A
0.23B
D/E
1.25C
25.9xB
P/E
47.2xC
1.96C+
PEG
0.75A-
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
OSCR
ALHC
83% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
58% below
decline
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-6%/yr
+372%
1-yr DCF upside
+83%
+506%
5-yr DCF upside
+137%
+751%
10-yr DCF upside
+246%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
OSCR
No notable signals flagged.
ALHC
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
The companies
OSCROscar Health, Inc.
Healthcare Plans · $33.37 · beta 2.47
Why now
Healthcare Plans · market cap $10.3b. 3% off the 52-week high of $34.48. Revenue growing +27% — in hypergrowth territory. 10 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $35.40 (implying +6% upside).
Moat
ROE 34% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income, mostly because of cash released from working capital ($3.7b) — a release that doesn't repeat every year the way earnings can.
Risk
Beta 2.47 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. Net margin 3.6% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
ALHCAlignment Healthcare, Inc.
Healthcare Plans · $7.54 · beta 1.14
Why now
Healthcare Plans · market cap $1.6b. Down 70% from 52-week high of $25.12 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +46% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.75 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 13 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $17.15 (implying +127% upside).
Moat
ROE 20% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income.
Risk
Down 70% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Trailing P/E 47x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. Net margin 0.9% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
The model favors OSCR (77) over ALHC (69) due to OSCR's superior Quality pillar score of 80 versus ALHC's 46, compounded by ALHC's "Diluting shareholders" signal. A contrarian, however, might prefer ALHC for its implied growth rate of -6% per year, suggesting significantly less optimism is priced into its current valuation.
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 OSCR and ALHC diverge
On the headline score the gap is 17.9 points in favor of OSCR. The widest single difference is Quality, where OSCR leads by 34.8 points.
QualityOSCR 80.4 · ALHC 45.6OSCR +34.8
ValueOSCR 87.9 · ALHC 75.9OSCR +12.0
GrowthOSCR 95.3 · ALHC 97.7level
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 OSCR or ALHC the better stock?
OSCR scores higher: OSCR 87.6, ALHC 69.7 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 OSCR and ALHC differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where OSCR leads by 35 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. OSCR also leads value, while growth is effectively level between them.
How are OSCR and ALHC 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.