Compare StocksEPAM vs UNH

EPAM Systems, Inc. (EPAM) vs UnitedHealth Group Incorporated (UNH)

EPAM
EPAM Systems, Inc.
$112.33
VS
UNH
UnitedHealth Group Incorporated
$368.78

Rewards

EPAM
  • EPAM Systems, Inc. has maintained ROIC above 10% for 4 consecutive years, suggesting solid business economics.
  • EPAM Systems, Inc. scores 78/100 on the Economic Moat Score (Wide Moat), with reinvestment efficiency as the strongest competitive dimension.
  • Free cash flow has grown at a 17.0% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.
UNH
  • Dividend yield of 2.40% with a consistent or growing payout over the past 4 years.

Risks

EPAM
    UNH
    • ROIC has declined by 7.9 percentage points over the observed period, which may signal competitive erosion.
    • Gross margin of 18.8% is low, suggesting a competitive or commodity-like market with limited pricing power.
    • FCF yield of 5.3% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.

    Key Valuation Metrics

    Learn more →
    EPAM
    UNH
    Valuation
    $725.31M
    Free Cash Flow
    $17.69B
    12.24%
    FCF Yield
    5.28%
    16.72
    Trailing P/E
    27.85
    8.07
    Forward P/E
    17.77
    Quality & Moat
    13.38%
    ROIC
    15.60%
    10.27%
    ROE
    11.45%
    28.88%
    Gross Margin
    18.80%
    1.69
    PEG Ratio
    39.79
    Balance Sheet Safety
    0.04
    Debt / Equity
    0.74
    N/A
    Interest Coverage
    N/A
    -1.63
    Net Debt / EBITDA
    2.18
    N/A
    Dividend Yield
    2.40%
    EPAM: 7Ties: 1UNH: 3
    EPAMUNH

    Historical Fundamentals

    Learn more →
    EPAM

    Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation.

    UNH

    Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation.

    Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation.

    $1 Retained Earnings Test

    Learn more →
    EPAM
    $-6.22
    created per $1 retained over 3 years
    Market Cap Declined
    Σ Retained
    $1.25B
    Δ Market Cap
    $-7.78B
    Buffett's "$1 Test": For every $1 of earnings retained, has management created at least $1 of market value?
    > $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer
    UNH
    $-7.37
    created per $1 retained over 3 years
    Market Cap Declined
    Σ Retained
    $26.63B
    Δ Market Cap
    $-196.16B
    Buffett's "$1 Test": For every $1 of earnings retained, has management created at least $1 of market value?
    > $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer

    Buffett's "$1 Test": For every $1 of earnings retained, has management created at least $1 of market value?
    > $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer

    Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) Analysis

    Learn more →
    EPAM
    40.2% Margin of Safety
    Price is 40.2% below estimated fair value
    Current Price: $112.33
    Fair Value: $187.71
    Strongly undervalued
    Undervalued
    Fairly valued
    Overvalued
    Strongly overvalued
    UNH
    9.6% Overvalued
    Price is 9.6% above estimated fair value
    Current Price: $368.78
    Fair Value: $336.33
    Strongly undervalued
    Undervalued
    Fairly valued
    Overvalued
    Strongly overvalued

    Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

    Learn more →
    EPAM

    What growth rate is the market pricing in at $112?

    +1.4%
    Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
    Standard FCF implies -7.9%

    The market implies +1.4% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

    Standard FCF implies a demanding -7.9%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

    UNH

    What growth rate is the market pricing in at $369?

    +13.9%
    Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
    Standard FCF implies +8.7%

    The market implies +13.9% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

    Standard FCF implies a demanding +8.7%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

    Economic Moat Score

    Learn more →
    EPAM
    78/100
    Wide Moat
    70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

    Wide moat with strength across all dimensions. Reinvestment Efficiency is the standout factor.

    Composite score measuring competitive advantage durability across four dimensions: returns above cost of capital, pricing power stability, revenue predictability, and capital efficiency. Based on 5 years of fundamental data.
    UNH
    64/100
    Narrow Moat
    70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

    Narrow moat with revenue predictability as the key competitive advantage. Improving margin stability would strengthen the moat.

    Composite score measuring competitive advantage durability across four dimensions: returns above cost of capital, pricing power stability, revenue predictability, and capital efficiency. Based on 4 years of fundamental data.

    Forensic Accounting

    Learn more →
    EPAM
    -2.58
    Unlikely Manipulator
    Above -1.78 = likely manipulator · -2.22 to -1.78 = grey zone

    M-Score Trend

    Beneish's 8-variable model estimates the probability of earnings manipulation. An M-Score above -1.78 signals elevated risk — companies in this range have historically been 3-5× more likely to be manipulating earnings. Scores between -2.22 and -1.78 fall in a grey zone warranting further investigation.
    UNH
    -2.45
    Unlikely Manipulator
    Above -1.78 = likely manipulator · -2.22 to -1.78 = grey zone

    M-Score Trend

    Beneish's 8-variable model estimates the probability of earnings manipulation. An M-Score above -1.78 signals elevated risk — companies in this range have historically been 3-5× more likely to be manipulating earnings. Scores between -2.22 and -1.78 fall in a grey zone warranting further investigation.

    Beneish's 8-variable model estimates the probability of earnings manipulation. An M-Score above -1.78 signals elevated risk — companies in this range have historically been 3-5× more likely to be manipulating earnings. Scores between -2.22 and -1.78 fall in a grey zone warranting further investigation.

    Ownership Breakdown

    Learn more →
    EPAM
    Insiders 3.2%Institutions 113.9%
    No. of Institutional Holders842
    High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders — a key signal in Buffett-style analysis. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.
    UNH
    Insiders 0.8%Institutions 84.7%Retail & Other 14.5%
    No. of Institutional Holders4,077
    High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders — a key signal in Buffett-style analysis. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.

    High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.

    Insider Buying Activity

    Learn more →
    EPAM
    0
    Buys (3M)
    4
    Buys (12M)
    Total value (12M): $60,000
    SHNAYDER BORIS
    Officer
    $15,000
    @ $135.14 · 2025-10-31
    SOLOMON LAWRENCE F
    Officer
    $15,000
    @ $135.14 · 2025-10-31
    ABRAHAMS GARY C
    Officer
    $15,000
    @ $135.14 · 2025-10-31
    DVORKIN VIKTAR
    Officer
    $15,000
    @ $135.14 · 2025-10-31
    YEZHKOV SERGEY
    Officer
    $7,499
    @ $133.91 · 2025-04-30
    YEZHKOV SERGEY
    Officer
    $7,499
    @ $133.91 · 2025-04-30
    Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
    UNH
    0
    Buys (3M)
    5
    Buys (12M)
    Total value (12M): $31.61M
    HEMSLEY STEPHEN J
    Chief Executive Officer
    $25.02M
    @ $288.57 · 2025-05-16
    REX JOHN F
    President
    $5.00M
    @ $291.12 · 2025-05-16
    GIL KRISTEN
    Director
    $1.00M
    @ $271.17 · 2025-05-15
    NOSEWORTHY JOHN H
    Director
    $93,647
    @ $312.16 · 2025-05-14
    FLYNN TIMOTHY PATRICK
    Director
    $491,786
    @ $320.80 · 2025-05-14
    FLYNN TIMOTHY PATRICK
    Director
    $511,575
    @ $511.57 · 2025-01-17
    Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises

    Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises.

    Insider Selling Activity

    Learn more →
    EPAM
    0
    Sells (3M)
    6
    Sells (12M)
    Total value (12M): $6.34M
    SHNAYDER BORIS
    Officer
    $1.03M
    @ $207.00 · 2025-12-10
    ABRAHAMS GARY C
    Officer
    $107,574
    @ $179.29 · 2025-11-17
    YEZHKOV SERGEY
    Officer
    $227,058
    @ $150.27 · 2025-10-21
    YEZHKOV SERGEY
    Officer
    $1.52M
    @ $150.86 · 2025-10-02
    YEZHKOV SERGEY
    Officer
    $1.52M
    @ $150.86 · 2025-10-02
    SHNAYDER BORIS
    Officer
    $1.93M
    @ $183.97 · 2025-05-22
    YEZHKOV SERGEY
    Officer
    $3.58M
    @ $199.07 · 2025-03-05
    FEJES BALAZS
    Officer
    $1.08M
    @ $200.00 · 2025-03-04
    PETERSON JASON D
    Chief Financial Officer
    $277,046
    @ $257.00 · 2025-01-27
    PETERSON JASON D
    Chief Financial Officer
    $119,248
    @ $257.00 · 2024-12-11
    DVORKIN VIKTAR
    Officer
    $1.73M
    @ $256.53 · 2024-12-11
    PETERSON JASON D
    Chief Financial Officer
    $237,000
    @ $237.00 · 2024-11-07
    Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
    UNH
    1
    Sells (3M)
    2
    Sells (12M)
    Total value (12M): $463,645
    CONWAY PATRICK HUGH M.D.
    Officer
    $284,000
    @ $355.00 · 2026-04-23
    CONWAY PATRICK HUGH M.D.
    Chief Executive Officer
    $179,645
    @ $305.00 · 2025-06-10
    Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives

    Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives.

    🎭 Mr. Market's Mood

    Learn more →
    EPAM
    FearGreed
    😨Fear(22/100)

    "Market is pessimistic — investigate whether fears are temporary or structural"

    Composite sentiment score based on 6 market signals. Inspired by Buffett's "Mr. Market" allegory — fear = potential opportunity, greed = potential risk. Must be used alongside fundamental analysis, not in isolation.
    UNH
    FearGreed
    😏Greed(65/100)

    "Market is optimistic — be cautious and ensure you have a margin of safety"

    Composite sentiment score based on 6 market signals. Inspired by Buffett's "Mr. Market" allegory — fear = potential opportunity, greed = potential risk. Must be used alongside fundamental analysis, not in isolation.

    Composite sentiment score based on market signals. Inspired by Buffett’s "Mr. Market" allegory — fear = potential opportunity, greed = potential risk. Must be used alongside fundamental analysis, not in isolation.

    ⚖️ Buffett Signal

    Learn more →
    EPAM
    Awaiting DCF Data

    The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.

    DCF Margin of Safety: N/AMr. Market's Mood: Fear (22)
    UNH
    Awaiting DCF Data

    The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.

    DCF Margin of Safety: N/AMr. Market's Mood: Greed (65)
    View EPAM Full AnalysisView UNH Full Analysis
    EPAM vs UNH: Which Is the Better Buy? | SafetyMargin.io