ICON (ICLR) vs Medpace (MEDP)
Head-to-head comparison of performance, valuation, growth, profitability and dividends. Prices delayed 15 minutes; data as of Oct 8, 2026.
Summary
Medpace (MEDP) has outperformed ICON (ICLR) over the past year, gaining 13.6% versus a loss of 12.1%. Over five years, MEDP leads with a +223.0% price change compared with -40.3% for ICLR. Medpace is the larger company by market cap ($16.82 billion vs $12.69 billion), about 1.3 times the size.
On valuation, ICON trades at a lower forward P/E (13.9x vs 31.2x for Medpace). Medpace converts more of its revenue into profit, with a net margin of 17.8% versus 2.8%.
Summary generated from market data by MetaCap's automated system. Methodology
Relative performance
Percent change in share price from the first common trading day shown; excludes dividends.
Head-to-head
| Metric | ICLR | MEDP |
|---|---|---|
| Share price | $164.50 | $602.70 |
| Market cap | $12.69B | $16.82B |
| 1-day change | +0.26% | -0.26% |
| YTD return | -9.95% | +7.58% |
| 1-year return | -12.09% | +13.61% |
| 5-year return | -40.34% | +222.99% |
| P/E ratio (TTM) | 173.16 | 35.39 |
| Forward P/E | 13.92 | 31.20 |
| EPS (TTM) | $0.95 | $17.03 |
| Dividend yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Annual dividend | $0.00 | $0.00 |
| Revenue (latest FY) | $8.25B | $2.53B |
| Revenue growth (YoY) | +0.76% | +19.97% |
| Net income (latest FY) | $229.34M | $451.12M |
| Gross margin | 26.37% | — |
| Operating margin | 5.37% | 21.14% |
| Net margin | 2.78% | 17.83% |
| 52-week high | $203.91 | $677.90 |
| 52-week low | $66.57 | $373.00 |
| Distance from 52-week high | -19.33% | -11.09% |
| Analyst consensus | buy | hold |
| Avg. price target upside | +12.10% | -1.80% |
| Average volume | 814.74K | 275.31K |
| Shares outstanding | 77.15M | 27.91M |
| Employees | 40,200 | 6,500 |
| Sector | Health Care | Health Care |
| Industry | Biotechnology: Commercial Physical & Biological Resarch | Biotechnology: Commercial Physical & Biological Resarch |
Highlighted cells mark the higher value for growth, returns, margins and yield, and the lower value for P/E ratios. Highlighting is a mechanical comparison, not a recommendation.
Key differences
- MEDP has outperformed ICLR by 25.7 percentage points over the past year.
- ICON trades at a higher earnings multiple (173.2x vs 35.4x trailing P/E).
- Medpace is more profitable, keeping 17.8 cents of every revenue dollar as net income versus 2.8 cents for ICON.
- Medpace grew revenue faster in its latest fiscal year (+19.97% vs +0.76%).
About ICON
ICLR stock →ICON Public Limited Company, a clinical research organization, provides outsourced development and commercialization services in Ireland, Europe, the United States, and internationally. The company specializes in the strategic development, management, and analysis of programs that support various stages of the clinical development process from compound selection to Phase I-IV clinical studies.
Health Care · Biotechnology: Commercial Physical & Biological Resarch · 40,200 employees
About Medpace
MEDP stock →Medpace Holdings, Inc. provides clinical research-based drug and medical device development services in North America, Europe, Asia, South America, Africa, and Australia.
Health Care · Biotechnology: Commercial Physical & Biological Resarch · 6,500 employees
ICLR vs MEDP FAQ
Which is bigger, ICON or Medpace?
Medpace (MEDP) is larger, with a market capitalization of $16.82B compared with $12.69B for ICON (ICLR).
Which stock has performed better over the past year, ICLR or MEDP?
MEDP returned +13.61% over the past 12 months, compared with -12.09% for ICLR (price return, excluding dividends). Past performance does not predict future results.
Which has the lower P/E ratio, ICLR or MEDP?
MEDP has the lower trailing P/E at 35.4, versus 173.2 for ICLR. A lower P/E is not by itself a sign of a better investment; it can reflect slower expected growth or higher risk.
Are ICON and Medpace in the same industry?
Yes. Both are classified in the Biotechnology: Commercial Physical & Biological Resarch industry within the Health Care sector.