Skip to main content
Homepage
Full 18-step deep-dive · ~20–30 min · a member feature.
AGING Analysis Report
Aug 11, 2026
12 days ago · 100% complete
NOT DEPENDABLE This report predates a filing — its financial basis has been replaced.
Report generated: Aug 11, 2026 · Filing on record since: Aug 22, 2026 · 11 days after
For AI assistants & researchers — machine-readable summary of this page

What this page is: Delvantic's full research page for Canadian Pacific Kansas City Limited (CP) — AI-driven forensic equity research: mechanical valuation models (DCF, EPV, anchored-PE, scenario) plus three independent AI lenses (Quality / Value / Sentiment). Everything below is rendered server-side; you are not missing content that requires JavaScript. All scores are predictions and research opinions, not financial advice.

Our current read (analysis of 2026-08-23): Designation Watch · Gem Score -2 (−100…+100 Quality+Value blend) · Quality 62 · Value -55 · Sentiment -16 (timing only, not weighted)

Page map (sections in order; each card carries a stable reference-name attribute you can cite):

  • profile-header / price-overview — company profile, live quote, market cap
  • extended-analysisthe core: three AI lens reads with findings, scores, and the analyst memo
  • future-predictions — our forward price-band predictions
  • market-narrative / ai-findings / gpt-critique — narrative context, cross-model findings, and an adversarial critique of our own analysis (near the end of the document)
  • Members-only sections (render as login gates for anonymous readers): price-history, income-trend, key-metrics, financials (statement tables), insider-trading. The analysis above is public; the raw data tables require a free account.

More for machine readers: site briefing at /llms.txt · any ticker resolves at delvantic.com/stock/TICKER · raw inputs are public-company filings and market data (via licensed data feeds); every model, score, lens read, and prediction on this page is Delvantic's own analysis.

Canadian Pacific Kansas City Limited

CP NYSE
Industrials · Railroads
Calgary, AB T2C 4X9, Canada cpkcr.com Updated Aug 11, 10:20am
Price
$91.82
Market Cap
$79.6B
Employees
19,943
Beta
1.22
Avg Volume
2,841,473
Last Dividend
$0.69
CEO
Mr. Keith E. Creel

Canadian Pacific Kansas City Limited is a Class I railroad providing rail freight transportation services across North America. It operates an extensive network of tracks spanning most of Canada, parts of the Midwestern and Northeastern United States, and into Mexico, offering single-line-haul services from Canada and the Upper Midwest through Texas, the Gulf of Mexico, and Mexico. The company also manages cross-border and intra-Mexico freight via operating concessions on more than 3,000 miles of rail in Mexico. Canadian Pacific Kansas City Limited hauls a diverse range of commodities, including grain, intermodal containers, energy products such as crude oil and frac sand, chemicals, plastics, coal, fertilizer and potash, automotive products, and various merchandise. As a key player in the industrials sector, specifically railroads, it facilitates efficient freight movement linking Canada, the United States, and Mexico, supporting trade and logistics throughout the continent. Headquartered in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, the company plays a vital role in North American supply chains.

Runs with full report Generated: Aug 11, 2026 10:32am
Price Overview
Price at report time
$91.79
as of Aug 11, 10:36am (12d ago)
Change · Aug 11
+1.28 (+1.41%)
Day Range
$90.76 – $91.95
52-Week Range
$68.42 – $93.95
50-Day MA
$89.56
200-Day MA
$81.25
Volume
18,688.00
Right now · live
Log in to get the live feed
Members see the real-time price and the move since this report (over 12d).
Share Structure
Outstanding 882,000,000.00
Float 808,489,162.00
Free Float 91.7%
High free float — 91.7% of shares trade freely, ~8.3% held by insiders/institutions
Very liquid — most shares trade freely. Low insider ownership can mean less management alignment, but makes large position sizing straightforward.
Price History (1 Year)
Last updated: Aug 11, 2026 10:50am (12d ago)
Revenue & Net Income Trend
The directional story — useful even when net income is negative.
Last updated: Aug 11, 2026 10:50am (12d ago)
Revenue
The top line — total sales before any costs or taxes are subtracted. A measure of how much business the company is doing.
Net Income
The bottom line — profit left after subtracting all expenses, interest, and taxes from revenue. Reflects accounting profitability, but includes non-cash items like depreciation, so it isn't the same as cash earned.
Operating Cash Flow
The real cash generated by the day-to-day business — selling products, paying suppliers, collecting from customers. Calculated from net income by adding back non-cash items and adjusting for timing (unpaid bills, unsold inventory). When OCF consistently lags net income, the reported profit may not be converting to real money.
Period Revenue Net Income Net Margin YoY/QoQ
Key Metrics
TD Twelve Data statement HEX SEC filing
Industry comparison last run: Aug 11, 2026 10:29am
P/E Ratio (Price per dollar of earnings)
HEX
Stock Price / EPS (Diluted)
28.36
Stock Price: $91.82
EPS (Diluted): 3.24
P/B Ratio (Price vs net asset value)
HEX
Stock Price / Book Value Per Share
2.51
Stock Price: $91.82
Total Equity: $33.61B
Shares: 917,100,000
EV/EBITDA (Total value vs operating profit)
HEX
Enterprise Value / EBITDA
14.51
Market Cap: $79.57B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $132.09M
EBITDA: $5.48B
Enterprise Value (Takeover price (cap + debt - cash))
HEX
Market Cap + Total Debt - Cash
$79.4B
Market Cap: $79.57B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $132.09M
Gross Margin (Revenue left after direct costs)
HEX
Gross Profit / Revenue
Gross Profit: N/A
Revenue: $10.82B
Missing from API: Gross Profit
Operating Margin (Revenue left after all operations)
HEX
Operating Income / Revenue
37.2%
Operating Income: $4.03B
Revenue: $10.82B
Net Margin (Revenue left as actual profit)
HEX
Net Income / Revenue
27.5%
Net Income: $2.97B
Revenue: $10.82B
ROE (Profit from shareholder equity)
HEX
Net Income / Total Equity
8.8%
Net Income: $2.97B
Total Equity: $33.61B
ROIC (Profit from all invested capital)
HEX
NOPAT / Invested Capital
9.1%
Operating Income: $4.03B
Tax Rate: 24.5%
Equity: $33.61B
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $132.09M
Zero debt — invested capital = equity minus cash (very efficient)
Current Ratio (Can it pay short-term bills)
HEX
Current Assets / Current Liabilities
0.49
Current Assets: $2.11B
Current Liabilities: $4.30B
Debt/Equity (Leverage — debt vs equity)
HEX
Total Debt / Total Equity
0.00
Short-Term Debt: $0.00
Long-Term Debt: $0.00
Total Debt: $0.00
Total Equity: $33.61B
Zero debt — this company carries no debt obligations. Strongest possible score.
Rev/Share (Top-line per share)
HEX
Revenue / Shares Outstanding
$11.80
Revenue: $10.82B
Shares: 917,100,000
Book Value/Share (Net assets per share)
HEX
(Total Assets - Total Liabilities) / Shares
$36.65
Total Equity: $33.61B
Shares: 917,100,000
FCF/Share (Real cash generated per share)
HEX
(Operating Cash Flow + CapEx) / Shares
$1.73
Operating CF: $3.81B
CapEx: -$2.23B
Shares: 917,100,000
CapEx is negative (outflow) — added to OCF to get FCF
Div Yield (Annual income from holding)
TD
Last Annual Dividend / Stock Price
0.7%
Last Dividend: $0.69
Stock Price: $91.82
Payout Ratio (Earnings paid out as dividends)
HEX
Dividends Paid / Net Income
19.2%
Dividends Paid: -$571.42M
Net Income: $2.97B
Industry Benchmarks
Last run: Aug 11, 2026 10:29am
Compares CP against LLM-researched typical ranges for its industry. One research call per industry, cached indefinitely — every stock in the same industry reuses the same baseline.
Income Statement (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 11, 2026 10:50am (12d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Revenue $5.7B $6.3B $9.0B $10.4B $10.8B
Cost of Revenue
Gross Profit
Operating Expenses $3.4B $3.9B $5.9B $6.7B $6.8B
Operating Income $2.3B $2.4B $3.2B $3.7B $4.0B
Net Income $2.0B $2.5B $2.8B $2.7B $3.0B
EBITDA $2.9B $3.0B $4.3B $5.1B $5.5B
EPS $3.02 $2.71 $3.03 $2.86 $3.24
EPS (Diluted) $3.00 $2.71 $3.02 $2.86 $3.24
Balance Sheet (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 11, 2026 10:21am (12d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Cash & Equivalents $49.5M $323.8M $333.1M $530.5M $132.1M
Total Current Assets $970.6M $1.4B $2.2B $2.4B $2.1B
Total Assets $48.9B $52.8B $57.4B $63.0B $61.7B
Current Liabilities $2.3B $2.3B $4.1B $4.1B $4.3B
Long-Term Debt
Total Liabilities $24.7B $24.8B $26.9B $27.9B $28.1B
Total Equity $24.3B $27.9B $30.4B $35.1B $33.6B
Retained Earnings $7.5B $9.5B $11.8B $13.9B $14.2B
Cash Flow (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 11, 2026 10:50am (12d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Operating Cash Flow $2.6B $3.0B $3.0B $3.8B $3.8B
Capital Expenditure -$1.1B -$1.1B -$1.8B -$2.0B -$2.2B
Free Cash Flow $1.5B $1.9B $1.2B $1.8B $1.6B
Acquisitions (net) $0 $0
Net Debt Issued / (Repaid) -$257.7M -$409.9M -$1.7B -$1.7B -$682.7M
Dividends Paid -$364.0M -$507.5M -$507.5M -$509.0M -$571.4M
Stock Buybacks $0 $0 $0 $0 -$2.8B
Net Change in Cash -$46.7M $264.9M $9.3M $197.4M -$398.4M
Growth Trends (YoY %)
Last updated: Aug 11, 2026 10:50am (12d ago)
Metric 2022 2023 2024 2025
Revenue Growth +10.2% +42.4% +15.9% +3.7%
Gross Profit Growth
Operating Income Growth +3.8% +31.8% +18.0% +8.3%
Net Income Growth +23.3% +11.7% -5.3% +11.4%
EBITDA Growth +4.1% +41.8% +19.4% +7.8%
Dividend History (Last 20)
Last updated: Aug 11, 2026 10:21am (12d ago)
Date Dividend Declaration Record Payment
2026-06-26 $0.19
2026-03-27 $0.17
2025-09-26 $0.16
2025-06-27 $0.17
2025-03-28 $0.13
2024-12-27 $0.13
2024-09-27 $0.14
2024-06-28 $0.14
2024-03-27 $0.14
2023-12-28 $0.14
2023-09-28 $0.14
2023-06-29 $0.14
2023-03-30 $0.14
2022-12-29 $0.14
2022-09-29 $0.14
2022-06-23 $0.15
2022-03-24 $0.15
2021-12-30 $0.15
2021-09-23 $0.15
2021-06-24 $0.15
0Company Classification 1Industry Landscape 2Company Momentum 3Forward Projection 4aDCF Valuation 4bEarnings Power Value 4cAnchored PE 4dReverse DCF 4eRevenue-Based DCF 4fAnchored P/S 4gScenario Analysis 4hDividend Discount Model 4iBook Value Analysis 4jInsider Activity 4fCash Flow Quality 4gDebt Maturity Risk 4hMacro Environment 4iSector Intelligence 4jRevenue Confidence 4kSensitivity Analysis 4lSector Demand Cycle 5AI Investigation 5bThesis Evaluation 6Valuation Synthesis
computed not applicable not yet run 12 computed · 6 not applicable · 6 not yet run
Narrative Economics
The story the market is telling about this stock — the intangible X-factor (founder mythology, cult dynamics, TAM-of-imagination) that moves price beyond what cash flows alone explain. After Shiller, Narrative Economics.
No narrative profile yet for CP — it's generated by the pipeline (market-narrative step).
AI Lens 4th lens · how AI reaches this business · 5-yr
2026-08-11
The creme is there an opportunity here? Neutral
AI is not the variable that decides CP — it is a modest cost tailwind on an asset AI can't reproduce, with the only real AI threat arriving indirectly through autonomous trucks.
Exposure is genuinely low at 36 and position mildly favorable at 60: scarcity migration (85) and entrant compression (91) say the right-of-way gets relatively more valuable as software commoditizes, while margin conversion (59) is capped by crew rules and labor agreements, not by technology. The live danger is solution persistence (74) in intermodal — watch intermodal revenue-per-unit against dry-van spot rates and autonomous mileage on the Texas corridors, because that spread, not anything CP ships internally, is where AI would actually take money out of this network.
60
AI Position
Mildly favorable - physical scarcity dominates, one real AI-adjacent threat
AI cannot reproduce a cross-border right-of-way, so cheap intelligence mostly arrives as operating-cost leverage — but autonomous trucking is the one channel through which AI can genuinely attack CP's intermodal pricing.
Exposure 36 Confidence 68 50 = neutral
Primary Tailwind

Cheap machine intelligence attacks CP's largest controllable costs — crew utilization, dwell, train length/energy optimization, and wayside/machine-vision inspection replacing manual car and track inspection — inside a business where the monetized unit (carload, ton-mile, contract lane) is priced off shipper alternatives, not off CP's cost, so savings can stick as margin.

Primary Pressure

Autonomous and driver-assisted trucking is an AI application that directly compresses the cost gap rail exploits in intermodal and shorter-haul merchandise; if truckload cost per mile falls structurally, CP's intermodal pricing power and the nearshoring corridor story both get repriced downward.

Critical Hinge

Whether AI-driven trucking cost deflation materializes at scale in the Texas–Mexico and transcontinental lanes CP is built around. Observable: CP intermodal revenue-per-unit versus dry van spot rates over multi-quarter windows, plus autonomous fleet mileage on I-35/I-45 corridors.

Hard to Reproduce

Continuous single-line right-of-way from Canada through Chicago and Texas into Mexico, the Mexican operating concessions, terminals, and regulatory/common-carrier standing — none of which cheaper software creates or bypasses.

Forensic fingerprint same 11 factors for every stock · 0 unfavorable · 50 neutral · 100 favorable
Underlying Need Persistence do people still need this at all? 93
Moving grain, potash, chemicals, autos and containers across a continent is a physical need AI does not dematerialize.
CP is hired to relocate mass; cheap intelligence changes routing and paperwork but not the tonnage that must move. Only demand composition (coal, energy products) shifts, and for macro not AI reasons.
bulk volume trends by commodity · cross-border carload growth · coal and energy mix decay rate
relevance 72 · confidence 88
Solution Persistence will they still solve it this way? 74
Rail stays the cheapest mode for heavy long-haul, but intermodal's advantage rests on truck driver cost that AI can attack.
For bulk, physics keeps rail unmatched. For intermodal and shorter merchandise hauls, the value proposition is a cost spread versus trucking, and autonomous trucking is precisely an AI capability aimed at that spread.
intermodal share of total revenue · truck spot rate versus intermodal RPU · autonomous truck lane deployments in Texas
relevance 64 · confidence 62
Intelligence Commoditization does cheap AI power them or copy them? 64
Cheap AI is an input CP buys, not a substitute for what CP sells.
Dispatch optimization, inspection vision models and predictive maintenance are procurable and diffuse across all Class I railroads, so gains are real but shared and unlikely to be uniquely capitalized by CP.
operating ratio versus peer Class Is · AI capex disclosed in tech spend · technology vendor exclusivity claims
relevance 42 · confidence 72
Responsibility Transfer are they paid to take the blame? 61
CP carries common-carrier obligation and hazmat liability that no software layer absorbs.
Shippers outsource regulated safety and derailment liability alongside the haul; that liability is a barrier to any asset-light AI intermediary claiming the customer relationship, but it is not something CP prices for explicitly.
safety incident and derailment rate · hazmat volume and insurance cost · regulator stance on automated inspection
relevance 32 · confidence 60
Scarcity Migration do their assets get rarer or more common? 85
As software and analysis become abundant, contiguous cross-border right-of-way becomes relatively scarcer.
CP's scarce assets — single-line Canada-US-Mexico track, Mexican concessions, terminals, Laredo crossing — are exactly the category AI cannot deflate, so their relative value rises as information work commoditizes.
Laredo crossing volume share · Mexico concession renewal terms · new terminal and industrial siting wins
relevance 82 · confidence 80
Customer DIY Preference will customers just build it themselves? 89
No shipper can internalize a railroad regardless of how cheap intelligence gets.
The DIY question that hollows out software vendors is inert here; the only partial substitution is shippers shifting modes, not building capability, so relevance is deliberately low.
private fleet mode shift announcements · large shipper trucking contracts · shipper-owned transload facilities
relevance 30 · confidence 85
AI Intermediation Position do AI agents go through them or around them? 54
AI-native brokers and shipper agents can commoditize rate discovery and reduce CP to a quoted execution layer.
CP remains physically unavoidable for rail moves, but if agents shop lanes on price and transit time via APIs, service-based differentiation and relationship pricing thin out.
share of volume booked via third-party platforms · contract versus spot pricing mix · digital booking API partnerships
relevance 48 · confidence 55
Data Leverage does their data make AI better? 52
Rich network telemetry improves CP's own operations but is not a defensible external data moat.
Locomotive, wayside and dwell data feeds internal models and every Class I has an equivalent corpus; the data lowers cost rather than creating a proprietary product customers pay extra for.
network velocity and dwell metrics · predictive maintenance failure reduction · any monetized shipper data product
relevance 34 · confidence 58
AI Margin Conversion do the AI savings become profit? 59
Real cost savings exist in labor, fuel and inspection, but union agreements and crew rules throttle how much reaches profit.
With operating margin already ~37%, incremental AI-driven velocity and inspection savings can flow to the operating ratio, yet US crew-size regulation and labor agreements delay the largest headcount lever, and competitive intermodal pricing can hand savings to shippers.
operating ratio trajectory versus 2025 37.2% · comp and benefits per employee · labor agreement terms on crew size
relevance 66 · confidence 58
Revenue Unit Durability does the thing they charge for survive? 71
Carload and ton-mile pricing is durable in bulk, contestable in intermodal.
CP charges for physical movement, a unit AI cannot dissolve the way it dissolves seats or billable hours; the risk is price per unit, not the unit itself, and that risk sits in truck-competitive lanes.
core pricing gains ex-fuel · RPU by commodity group · intermodal contract renewal pricing
relevance 60 · confidence 62
Entrant Compression how easily can newcomers copy them? 91
Cheap software builds competitors in most industries; it cannot build a parallel railroad.
Capital, land assembly and regulatory approval make new Class I entry effectively impossible, and STB posture caps further consolidation, so AI-native entrants can only attack the booking layer or the mode, never the network.
STB merger and reciprocal switching rulings · new digital freight entrants targeting rail lanes · trucking capacity cost per mile
relevance 56 · confidence 86

AI Lens thesis

AI reaches CP through three narrow channels, not through its product: (1) internal cost — labor is the biggest opex line and AI-enabled dispatch, autonomous inspection, and fuel/energy optimization compress it, though two-person crew rules and union agreements cap how fast savings land; (2) demand mix — AI-era industrial demand (data-center aggregates, cement, steel, transformers, chemicals) is a modest positive while a cheaper truck cost curve is the material negative for intermodal; (3) intermediation — AI-native digital brokers and shipper agents route freight on price and transit reliability, which pushes CP toward being a commoditized execution layer quoted through third-party APIs rather than a relationship-priced carrier. Net: the scarce asset is physical and gets relatively scarcer as software commoditizes, so exposure is genuinely low and skewed slightly favorable, with the tail risk concentrated entirely in autonomous trucking rather than in anything CP does or fails to do with AI itself.

Thesis breaker Two consecutive years of intermodal revenue-per-unit declining while volumes hold — evidence CP is defending share against a structurally cheaper trucking cost curve — would flip this from mildly favorable to genuine erosion. Conversely, ratified crew-size flexibility or approved reduced-crew operations would push it decisively positive.
What the market may be underestimating

Upside Machine-vision inspection and predictive maintenance can lift network velocity and asset turns, which in a fixed-cost railroad converts to operating ratio improvement without capex — a lever the market treats as generic 'efficiency' rather than as AI-specific and compounding.

Downside AI-native freight platforms and shipper-side agents commoditizing rate discovery could erode CP's ability to price lanes on service differentiation, turning the cross-border corridor premium into a spot-priced utility spread just as the KCS synergy narrative requires pricing gains.

Outcome range spread 42

34Bear case
59Central case
76Bull case
Three headline numbers, deliberately never blended: Position (which way), Exposure (how much it matters at all), Confidence (how sure). The fingerprint asks every stock the same 11 questions so companies a sector label would lump together get told apart. Not an input to GEM/Coal or the Q/V/S lenses.
Claude Reading
Independent analyst synthesis · claude-opus-4-7 · generated 2026-08-11 10:49:13
Verdict Overvalued but not by 50% — fair value $60-65 vs $91.82; wait for OR compression below 60% or a pullback to the low-$70s before committing.

The raw numbers tell a less exciting story than the price. Revenue went from $2.59B in Q2'24 to $2.66B in Q1'26 — call it 2.7% over seven quarters, or roughly 1.5% annualized on the most recent trend. The 9.6% revenue CAGR is a merger artifact (KCS closed April 2023 lapped into 2022 comps of $6.33B); the underlying organic growth is GDP-plus at best, and the last four quarters (Q2'25 through Q1'26: $2.66B, $2.63B, $2.82B, $2.66B) show zero sequential progress. Net margins are volatile in a way that suggests earnings quality issues — 33.4% in Q2'25 collapsing to 22.9% in Q1'26 is a 1,000+ bps swing that isn't normal for a rail. That looks like tax/one-timer noise, and the "earnings YoY 11.4%" figure is cherry-picked against a weak Q1'25 comp ($653M vs $607M — actually *down* YoY, so I'd want to verify that momentum number). FCF of $1.58B on $79.6B market cap is a 2.0% FCF yield. That's the anchor.

At 28x earnings, 7.4x sales, and 14.5x EV/EBITDA for a business compounding earnings at 2.7% and posting 8.8% ROE / 9.1% ROIC — below cost of capital in most frameworks — the synthesis verdict is directionally correct. Where I part company is the magnitude: the composite fair value of $39.99 (signal-adjusted $44.77) implies CP should trade at ~12x earnings and 3.2x sales, which is below every Class I peer including CSX (2.8x P/S) and NSC (2.2x P/S). That's punitive. A more defensible fair value takes peer P/S of ~2.5x, applies a 15-20% premium for the unique Mexico corridor (real, if smaller than bulls claim), and lands around 3.0x sales — implying ~$41/share on sales but closer to $60-65/share on a 20-22x P/E of normalized $3.20 EPS. The stock is overvalued, but $45 is a recession-plus-synergy-failure scenario, not a base case.

The models mostly agree on direction but the market-forces "tailwinds" framing sits awkwardly against the thesis eval's -16 score and the synthesis "overvalued 51%" call — that's a real internal contradiction the reader should notice. Market-forces is describing a *setup* (nearshoring is real, moat is real) while thesis-eval is scoring *price* (already reflects it). Both can be true, and I side with thesis-eval: this is a wait-for-inflection story where the operating ratio needs to compress from ~63% toward the promised 57-58%, and until the quarterlies show it, you're paying for hope. The contrarian argument worth taking seriously: CP is the *only* single-line Canada-Mexico rail, capex is largely sunk, and if Mexican manufacturing volumes inflect in 2026-2027 the operating leverage on a fixed-cost network is extraordinary — a 300 bps OR improvement on $11B revenue is ~$330M of incremental EBIT, or ~10% earnings uplift per hundred bps. That's the bull case in one sentence, and it's not crazy.

Data quality flags: the balance sheet shows debt as "—" and debt/equity as 0, which is flatly wrong — CP took on ~$20B in debt for the KCS deal and the current ratio of 0.49 confirms significant near-term obligations. Any valuation model plugging D/E=0 into WACC is materially understating cost of capital and *overstating* fair value. The insider data (last transaction 2017) is useless — either a feed error or genuinely no recent activity, but I wouldn't weight it. The margin volatility quarter-to-quarter deserves a footnote read of the 10-Qs before trusting any DCF. Net: I agree with the synthesis on direction (overvalued) but dissent on magnitude — $45 is too aggressive; $60-65 is a more defensible fair value anchor, implying ~30% downside not 50%. This is a "don't chase, wait for either a $70 handle or an operating ratio print below 60%" story, not a short.

GPT Reading
Independent reading · gpt-5.4 · generated 2026-08-11 10:49:32
Verdict Overvalued at $91.82 — premier rail asset, but the stock already prices in most of the merger and Mexico upside; fair value looks closer to $70-$78.

CPKC looks like a very good railroad and a less attractive stock. The operating business is clearly solid: revenue went from $5.74B in 2021 to $10.82B in 2025, operating income from $2.30B to $4.03B, and net income from $2.05B to $2.97B. Even after the KCS integration, the business is still posting elite margins for an industrial franchise, with a 2025 operating margin of 37.2% and net margin of 27.5%. The quarterly revenue line is also stable rather than promotional: the last seven quarters have sat in a tight $2.55B-$2.82B band, which is what you want from a railroad. But that stability is exactly why the current valuation bothers me. At $79.6B market cap, investors are paying 7.8x sales, 14.5x EV/EBITDA, and 28.4x earnings for a company whose 2025 revenue grew just 3.6% and whose most recent quarter grew only about 3.7% year over year. Those are not bad growth numbers for a rail; they are simply nowhere near premium enough to justify a luxury multiple.

The core contradiction is between quality and acceleration. CPKC’s annual numbers show a step-up from the merger, but the post-merger run-rate now looks mature. 2025 revenue of $10.82B was only $380M above 2024’s $10.44B, while net income rose $300M to $2.97B. That is decent progress, yet not evidence of an earnings machine entering a new phase of compounding. In fact, the quarterly pattern suggests normalization: net margin was 33.4% in 2025-06, then 25.1% in 2025-09, 27.5% in 2025-12, and 22.9% in 2026-03. The latest quarter’s revenue of $2.66B was down from $2.72B a year earlier, while net income slipped from $653.3M to $607.3M. Even if seasonality and operating noise explain part of that, the burden of proof is on the bull case when the stock already discounts a multi-year synergy harvest. Free cash flow of $1.58B on a $79.6B equity value is roughly a 2.0% FCF yield, and that is on a year with nearly $3.0B of net income. For a capital-intensive railroad spending $2.23B in capex, that is too skinny.

What stands out most is that returns are good but not extraordinary relative to valuation. ROE of 8.8%, ROIC of 9.1%, and ROA of 4.8% are respectable for infrastructure, yet they do not scream franchise scarcity worth paying nearly 2.5x book and almost 8x revenue. If this were a software platform with 20% organic growth, maybe. For a railroad, the numbers imply the market is underwriting several years of operating leverage and network synergies before they are visible in the reported economics. The nearshoring and single-line Canada-U.S.-Mexico corridor story may be strategically real, but the financial statements today still read like a mature rail franchise with modest growth, heavy reinvestment needs, and some merger uplift already in the base. I do not think that deserves a valuation premium this large. On today’s fundamentals, I’d frame fair value more around a low-20s earnings multiple on roughly $3.20-$3.40 of sustainable EPS power, which points closer to $70-$78 than $92.

The best argument against this view is that I may be judging too early and too statically. CPKC is not just another GDP-plus railroad if the KCS combination truly creates the only seamless Canada-U.S.-Mexico network. A smart bull would point to the revenue base rising from $9.01B in 2023 to $10.82B in 2025, operating income up from $3.15B to $4.03B, and free cash flow growing at a double-digit clip, while arguing that current margins understate what the network can earn after integration friction fades. They would also note that a 37% operating margin and 27% net margin are already excellent, suggesting that incremental cross-border volume could be highly profitable. If Mexico manufacturing and intermodal flows inflect, a railroad with unique lanes can outrun the industry for longer than skeptics expect. I weigh that less heavily because the stock is not priced for “possible upside”; it is priced for delivery. At 28x earnings and a 2% FCF yield, you need visible evidence that growth is inflecting, not just a credible strategic narrative.

What would change my mind is simple: I need to see the premium translate into numbers. If CPKC can produce two or three consecutive quarters with revenue growth in the high single digits, hold net margin back above the mid-20s, and push annual free cash flow toward $2.2B-$2.5B without a major capex spike, then the current multiple would start to look more earned than aspirational. I would also revisit the thesis if 2026 operating income looks on track for something like $4.4B-$4.6B rather than low-single-digit growth off the 2025 base. Absent that, the current price embeds too much confidence in synergies and nearshoring benefits that are not yet adequately visible in the reported run-rate.

Grok Reading
Independent reading · grok-4.5 · generated 2026-08-11 10:50:04
Verdict Overvalued at $91.82 — paying 28× earnings and 7.8× sales for ~4% organic growth and 9% ROIC with merger upside already embedded

The numbers describe a high-quality railroad that has already been paid for twice. Revenue stepped from $6.33B in 2022 to $9.01B in 2023 and $10.44B in 2024 on the KCS combination, then only to $10.82B in 2025—roughly 3.6% growth once the deal anniversary rolled off. The last eight quarters sit in a $2.55–2.82B band with no sequential breakout; the most recent print at $2.66B is softer than the prior-year quarter. Net income reached $2.97B in 2025 with a 27.5% net margin and a 37.2% operating margin, which are excellent absolute levels, yet earnings CAGR over the five-year window is only 2.7% because the pre-merger base was already profitable and the post-merger lift has been uneven. Free cash flow of $1.58B after $2.23B of capex produces a ~2.0% FCF yield on the $79.6B equity value. ROIC at 9.1% and ROE at 8.8% are ordinary for heavy industry; a 28.4× P/E, 7.8× sales, and 14.5× EV/EBITDA are not. The market is embedding a multi-year volume and pricing ramp that the trailing data simply do not yet show.

The contradiction with the quantitative fair-value work is instructive rather than dismissible. Composite models land near $40–45, implying the stock is more than 50% rich at $91.82. That gap is almost entirely narrative: the single-line Canada–U.S.–Mexico franchise and the nearshoring thesis. Narrative intensity is strong and the platform-monopoly framing is coherent, but durability is only moderate because railroad synergies have a long history of disappointing and freight volumes remain cyclical. Recent revenue growth of 3.7% y/y and a current ratio of 0.49 with only $132M of cash underscore that this is still a capital-intensive, levered industrial, not a software-like compounder. Paying mid-to-high 20s earnings multiples for GDP-plus volume growth and high-single-digit ROIC is a bet on story realization, not on demonstrated economics.

The strongest opposing case is that CPKC is not a peer-average railroad and should not be valued like one. It is the only carrier with a true contiguous network from the Canadian Prairies through the U.S. heartland into Mexico; if nearshoring of manufacturing into Mexico accelerates, the incremental carloads and pricing power accrue disproportionately here. Operating margins already above 37% and FCF CAGR of 15% show the franchise can convert volume into cash once integration noise fades. Bulls will correctly note that peers trade at far lower multiples precisely because they lack this corridor, so a 40–50% premium can be rational if Mexico volumes compound and the operating ratio grinds toward the high-50s. They will also point out that 2025 net income still grew double-digits even as revenue decelerated, evidence that cost takeout is real. I weigh this less heavily because the premium already assumes those outcomes; at 28× earnings and 7.8× sales the market has prepaid for successful execution rather than leaving room for it. Industry history of failing to sustain 8–10% revenue growth at this scale remains the binding constraint.

What would flip the view is concrete evidence that the story is converting into cash faster than priced: two consecutive quarters of mid-to-high single-digit organic revenue growth driven by Mexico cross-border volumes, operating ratio sustained below 60%, and free-cash-flow run-rate clearly above $2B. A material multiple compression toward 18–20× on rising earnings would also reopen the risk/reward. Absent those, the stock remains a high-quality franchise priced for perfection.

Big-3 Panel — where each AI stands
Each AI above independently stated a direction (undervalued, fairly valued, or overvalued) and how strongly it believes it (conviction, 0–5). We combine those into a Bull-Bear Index on a 0–10 scale: 5 is neutral, 10 is maximum bullish (undervalued at full conviction), 0 is maximum bearish. We compute the score ourselves with the same arithmetic for every seat — the models never grade their own bullishness — so the three are directly comparable. Δ shows how far each seat sits from the panel average of 1.3; a large Δ marks the dissenting voice, usually the one worth reading.
Claude claude-opus-4-7 2.0
overvalued · conviction 3/5 · Δ +0.7 vs panel · self: 3.0
GPT gpt-5.4 1.0
overvalued · conviction 4/5 · Δ -0.3 vs panel · self: 3.0
Grok grok-4.5 1.0
overvalued · conviction 4/5 · Δ -0.3 vs panel · self: 3.0
Advanced Analysis Forensic deep-dive · separate lenses
Separate reads — Company Quality (is it a great business?), Valuation (is it mispriced?), and General Sentiment (how macro + narrative are pushing it), plus AI Impact (how the AI wave reshapes it), kept deliberately apart · 2026-08-11 10:58:40
Delvantic - Cairn AI
Quality - wait for a dip 7/10
Great franchise, full price - I want CPKC in the high $60s, not here at $91.73.
The cruxWhether the KCS synergies and nearshoring volumes actually show up in reported numbers fast enough to grow into a multiple the market has already paid.
Forensic checks Derived mechanically from CP's filed financials — not from the AI lenses
Liquidity & RunwaySelf-Funding
DilutionHeavy Dilution
Earnings QualityHigh Earnings Quality
The four lensesswitch a tab for its full read — score + evidence
Company Quality
+62
Strong
edge √Σ 141 · risk √Σ 68 · conf 8/10

CP-KCS operates a rare, essentially irreplaceable asset: a Class I railroad network now spanning Canada, the US and Mexico. Revenue nearly doubled from $5.74B (2021) to $10.82B (2025) driven by the KCS combination, with operating margin holding in a strong 35-40% band (37.2% in 2025) and net income reaching $2.97B. Earnings quality looks clean: OCF/NI at 1.24x, accruals -1.1% of assets, and FCF of $1.58B in 2025 comfortably self-funds the business. Altman Z of 2.37 (grey) reflects the debt-heavy capital structure typical of a leveraged rail merger, not operational stress.

Strengths 4
m80
Elite operating margins for a mature industrial
OpM sustained at 35-40% (37.2% in 2025) on $10.82B revenue - reflects genuine rail-franchise economics and post-merger operating discipline.
m70
Clean earnings quality
OCF/NI 1.24x, accruals -1.1% of assets, FCF $1.58B - reported earnings are cash-backed with no mechanical red flags.
m75
Irreplaceable network asset / moat
Only single-line Class I rail connecting Canada-US-Mexico post-KCS; regulatory and physical barriers to replication are effectively absolute.
m55
Self-funding at scale
$1.58B FCF/yr covers capex, dividends and debt service without needing capital markets access.
Concerns 3
m55
KCS-merger dilution weighed on per-share value
Diluted share count rose from 682.8M to 934.6M (~37%) 2021-2024; net income grew but per-share economics were diluted significantly to acquire KCS.
m35
Grey-zone Altman Z (2.37) and thin cash
Only $132M liquid cash against a leveraged post-merger balance sheet; not distress, but leaves less cushion than a fortress rail peer.
m20
No informative insider signal
Insider tape ends 2017 with only awards/routine transactions - no directional read from management behavior.
This is a high-quality mature industrial: rail economics are structurally excellent, the KCS deal built something genuinely unique in North America, and the accounting looks honest with cash backing earnings. The blemish is real though - management paid for KCS heavily in stock, so per-share value took a one-time hit that mechanical dilution screens flag as chronic when it isn't. Balance sheet is leveraged but appropriate for the asset class. I'd call this Strong, comfortably above 75 but not near the 87 rung because leverage and the dilution overhang are genuine, not cosmetic.
Verify before trusting this (5)
  • Post-integration KCS synergy realization vs. targets and current operating ratio trajectory
  • Debt maturity ladder and net debt/EBITDA vs. investment-grade covenants
  • Whether 2025 share count decline reflects an active buyback program or just settlement mechanics
  • Customer/commodity concentration (grain, intermodal, energy) and Mexico exposure risk
  • Any material contingent liabilities from derailments or regulatory actions
Valuation / Mispricing
-55
Rich
edge √Σ 32 · risk √Σ 94 · conf 6/10
Price $91.73 vs deserved ~$65-75, roughly 20-30% above fair - rich, not absurd. attractive below $70.00

The e2e composite FV of $39.99 (signal-adj $44.77) implies CP should trade near half its current price - that would be a once-in-a-decade dislocation for a Class I rail with a genuine cross-border franchise, which strains credulity. The DCF at $21.72 and EPV floor at $27.25 are almost certainly penalizing the KCS share issuance as chronic dilution and ignoring merger-synergy runway; I discount them heavily. The anchored PE of $89.27 is the most credible input and lands roughly at spot, telling me the market is paying a peer-consistent multiple on current earnings. Adjusting for the strong quality grade (62), clean earnings, and the unique tri-national corridor, deserved value is probably $65-75 - a mid-teens multiple on normalized post-synergy EPS. Against $91.73, that is a 20-30% premium: the price already embeds successful KCS integration, nearshoring tailwinds, and pricing power. Nothing here is a screaming short, but there is no margin of safety and the setup requires the bull narrative to fully deliver. This is a quality business at a full-to-rich price - the classic 'good company, wait for a better entry' situation.

Cheap signals 2
m25
DCF/EPV likely overstate dilution drag
The KCS stock issuance was a one-time expansion of the asset base, not chronic dilution; mechanical models treating it as recurring understate deserved value materially.
m20
Quality and franchise uniqueness lift deserved value
Only tri-national Class I corridor plus clean earnings quality (score 2) justify a premium multiple vs pure-DCF fair value.
Rich / priced-in 3
m62
Composite FV far below price
Composite $39.99 and signal-adj $44.77 imply -51% downside; even discounting method quirks, all three methods sit below spot, and the average anchored-PE of $89.27 essentially matches price - no method says cheap.
m55
Synergy premium already in the tape
Paying $91.73 on a business whose EPV floor is $27 means the market is capitalizing KCS synergies and nearshoring at full value before they show up in reported numbers.
m45
Anchored PE = spot, not a discount
The peer-anchored PE lands at $89.27 vs $91.73 price - CP trades in line with rail comps, offering no relative-value edge.
I like the business but not the price. Composite FV screams overvalued at $40 but that math is broken by treating the KCS share issuance as ongoing dilution - I don't buy a $22 DCF on this franchise. My honest deserved value is $65-75, so at $91.73 I'm paying a 20-30% premium for a story that has to execute. Fine to hold if you own it, but I need it in the high $60s before I'd put fresh money to work. This is 'rich, not ruinous.'
Verify before trusting this (5)
  • KCS synergy realization vs the ~$1B run-rate target in latest 10-Q/transcript
  • Post-merger normalized share count and whether buybacks have resumed
  • Volume trends in cross-border intermodal and Mexico auto/grain lanes
  • Operating ratio trajectory - the key lever for whether the PE anchor holds
  • Free cash flow conversion net of merger integration capex
General Sentiment
-16
Balanced
tail √Σ 57 · head √Σ 74 · conf 6/10

The macro tape is modestly risk-on (regime +47, VIX 15.5, S&P near highs), which at a 1.22 beta would normally give CP a real push. But rails are a cyclical industrial, not a beneficiary of animal spirits, and the 10y at 4.65% with an inverted-ish curve presses directly on a debt-heavy post-KCS balance sheet. Net macro read on THIS name: a light crosswind, not a decisive force. The prime input is the narrative. CP still carries the 'only cross-border North American rail corridor / nearshoring platform monopoly' story with strong intensity and medium cult, which is why it trades at a rich multiple. But durability is only moderate, momentum has decelerated (3.7% recent vs 9.6% long-term, -3.8pp over 3y), and that is exactly the tape signature of a synergy story that is aging - not yet broken, but no longer accelerating. Analyst tone on rails has been drifting from euphoric to show-me. The result is a name where the bull narrative and the risk-on tape provide a floor, while narrative fatigue, rate pressure on leverage, and volume-cycle worry provide the offset. Balanced, with the edge toward mild headwind if nearshoring headlines cool.

Tailwinds 2
m35
Risk-on tape, dampened by sector
Regime +47 and low VIX help a 1.22-beta name, but rails do not lead in risk-on rallies the way high-beta growth does, so the lift is real but modest.
m45
Platform-monopoly narrative still intact
The cross-border corridor / nearshoring story remains strong-intensity with a medium cult following, which continues to support the premium multiple even as skeptics circle.
Headwinds 3
m50
Narrative aging, momentum decelerating
Recent 3-year momentum is -3.8pp below the longer trend and 3.7% recent vs 9.6% CAGR. That is the classic tape of a synergy story where the market is quietly demanding proof.
m45
Rates pressure a leveraged post-KCS balance sheet
10y at 4.65% is a specific press on CP because the KCS deal loaded the balance sheet; rail cash flows are steady but the debt-service optics get worse the longer rates stay here.
m30
Cyclical volume overhang
Rails are hostage to freight cycles and cross-border trade-policy noise; any softening in nearshoring headlines or tariff rhetoric hits this name harder than pure-domestic peers.
My blunt read: this is a Balanced tape with a slight headwind lean. The risk-on regime helps, and the monopoly-corridor narrative still commands respect, but the story is in its show-me phase - momentum has quietly rolled over, rates are pressing the post-KCS leverage, and rails do not get the euphoric bid a risk-on tape gives to AI or high-beta growth. Nothing is actively breaking, but nothing is actively lifting the stock either. Sentiment is not the reason to own or avoid CP today - it is a wash.
Verify before trusting this (5)
  • Q3/Q4 KCS synergy realization vs guidance - a miss cracks the platform narrative
  • Cross-border/Mexico volume trends and any tariff or trade-policy headlines
  • Analyst target revisions on rails - watch for a shift from beat-and-raise to in-line
  • 10y yield direction; a move back toward 4.2% eases the leverage overhang
  • Freight volume data (carloads, intermodal) as a real-time narrative check
The market-wide tape + this name's exposure to it (beta / sector / narrative durability). Context on the non-fundamental pressure — not a call on the business or the price. processId: detail-general-sentiment
AI Impact
+48
Mildly favorable - physical scarcity dominates, one real AI-adjacent threat
opp √Σ 107 · thr √Σ 0 · conf 7/10

AI reaches CP through three narrow channels, not through its product: (1) internal cost — labor is the biggest opex line and AI-enabled dispatch, autonomous inspection, and fuel/energy optimization compress it, though two-person crew rules and union agreements cap how fast savings land; (2) demand mix — AI-era industrial demand (data-center aggregates, cement, steel, transformers, chemicals) is a modest positive while a cheaper truck cost curve is the material negative for intermodal; (3) intermediation — AI-native digital brokers and shipper agents route freight on price and transit reliability, which pushes CP toward being a commoditized execution layer quoted through third-party APIs rather than a relationship-priced carrier. Net: the scarce asset is physical and gets relatively scarcer as software commoditizes, so exposure is genuinely low and skewed slightly favorable, with the tail risk concentrated entirely in autonomous trucking rather than in anything CP does or fails to do with AI itself.

AI opportunities 8
m62
Underlying Need Persistence
Moving grain, potash, chemicals, autos and containers across a continent is a physical need AI does not dematerialize.
m31
Solution Persistence
Rail stays the cheapest mode for heavy long-haul, but intermodal's advantage rests on truck driver cost that AI can attack.
m12
Intelligence Commoditization
Cheap AI is an input CP buys, not a substitute for what CP sells.
m7
Responsibility Transfer
CP carries common-carrier obligation and hazmat liability that no software layer absorbs.
m57
Scarcity Migration
As software and analysis become abundant, contiguous cross-border right-of-way becomes relatively scarcer.
m23
Customer DIY Preference
No shipper can internalize a railroad regardless of how cheap intelligence gets.
m25
Revenue Unit Durability
Carload and ton-mile pricing is durable in bulk, contestable in intermodal.
m46
Entrant Compression
Cheap software builds competitors in most industries; it cannot build a parallel railroad.
AI threats 0

None surfaced.

AI is not the variable that decides CP — it is a modest cost tailwind on an asset AI can't reproduce, with the only real AI threat arriving indirectly through autonomous trucks. Exposure is genuinely low at 36 and position mildly favorable at 60: scarcity migration (85) and entrant compression (91) say the right-of-way gets relatively more valuable as software commoditizes, while margin conversion (59) is capped by crew rules and labor agreements, not by technology. The live danger is solution persistence (74) in intermodal — watch intermodal revenue-per-unit against dry-van spot rates and autonomous mileage on the Texas corridors, because that spread, not anything CP ships internally, is where AI would actually take money out of this network.
Verify before trusting this (8)
  • Laredo crossing volume share
  • Mexico concession renewal terms
  • new terminal and industrial siting wins
  • bulk volume trends by commodity
  • cross-border carload growth
  • coal and energy mix decay rate
  • operating ratio trajectory versus 2025 37.2%
  • comp and benefits per employee
The structural effect of the AI wave on this specific business over the next ~5 years — demand, cost leverage, moat, barriers to entry, position in the AI stack. The reality beneath the AI story, not the story's market pressure (General Sentiment owns that) — and not a call on the business today or the price.
Growth Outlook
not run

This lens hasn't been run for this ticker yet.

The forward growth verdict — is the business itself likely to grow (next 2 quarters / year 1 / years 2–3), judged against its category and against printed expectations. The full horizon ladder + creme renders on the Growth Outlook card above. Not a call on the price (Valuation owns that) or the tape (Sentiment owns that).
Please log in to view trade setups
The Augustus trade-setup read is a members feature.
Log in
Lenses kept deliberately separate — Company Quality (price-agnostic), Valuation (price-conditional), General Sentiment (non-fundamental macro/narrative pressure), AI Impact (structural ~5yr AI exposure), and Growth Outlook (the forward growth verdict). The scores are not blended. Filing-level items (convertibles, lock-ups, customer concentration) are v2 — see each lens's "verify."
Price Prediction
Unavailable View weakness chain →

Prediction unavailable. valuation-synthesis has no result for CP — the prediction needs its fair-value anchors.

Community AI Feedback
No community reviews yet for CP. Be the first — hit How to Contribute, have any AI review this page, and paste its take back here.
My Notes personal — only you see this
v1.1.562 · 9b2927c4 · 2026-08-22 16:52:06