Union Pacific's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Union Pacific (UNP) against its publicly traded competitors: sales growth, net income, profitability, valuation and market share, plus each peer's market capitalization, revenue, income and employees. Free below: the top 5 peers. Subscriber access adds the full competitor list and CSV downloads.
Key Findings: Union Pacific vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 26,516M vs 120,392M combined for its competitors (18.0% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+9.7% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs decelerating (-5.5%) for its tracked peer group.
- Growth: Union Pacific generated 16.4% revenue growth year over year in Q3 2026, vs -5.9% for its competitors combined.
- Profitability: Its 28.6% net margin compares with 17.3% for the peer group.
- Scale: Union Pacific ranks #1 of 11 companies by market capitalization in the Railroads industry, holding 37.0% of industry market cap.
- Peer revenue share: Union Pacific accounted for 20.4% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, up from 17.1% a year earlier.
- Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $0.91M compares with $0.84M for the peer group (1.1x).
- Structure: Union Pacific operates in the following segments: Reportable.
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
UNP Sales vs. its Competitors, Q3 2026
Union Pacific reported revenue growth of 16.43 % year on year in Q3 2026, above its competitors' combined revenue change of -5.90 %.
With a net margin of 28.56 %, Union Pacific achieved higher profitability than its competitors (17.25 %).
Union Pacific generated 20.36 % of the combined sales of its peer group, up from 17.12 % a year earlier.
Union Pacific vs. its Competitors, Q3 2026
Revenue growth, year on year
Net income growth, year on year
Net margin
Revenue run-rate vs trailing 12 months
TTM net margin
TTM = trailing twelve months. Run-rate annualizes the latest quarter (×4) and compares it to TTM. In millions of $. High-Confidence Competitors are named as a competitor directly in Union Pacific reports; Similar-Size Competitors are the closest peers by market-cap rank within the same industry; Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors are the closest peers by combined revenue growth, operating margin and ROIC, all independent of the competitor list.
TTM revenue, latest-quarter run-rate and net income/margin benchmarked across Union Pacific and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| Union Pacific Corp | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| High-Confidence Competitors (1) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar-Size Competitors (5) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar Growth & Profitability (4) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across Union Pacific's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
For context: the Railroads industry grew revenue 8.2% year over year, combined, vs 16.4% for Union Pacific. Union Pacific's share of combined industry revenue moved from 15.02% to 16.16%, a gain of 1.14 percentage points.
Union Pacific's Competitor Quality Breadth
Group definitions: see Methodology: Performance Group Definitions.
| Entity | Profitable | Expanding | Above Industry Growth | Distressed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Union Pacific Corp | Yes | Yes | Yes | No |
| Competitors combined (18) | ||||
| High-Confidence Competitors (4) | ||||
| Similar-Size Competitors (5) | ||||
| Similar Growth & Profitability (8) | 100.00 % (8 of 8) | 100.00 % (8 of 8) | 75.00 % (6 of 8) | 0.00 % (0 of 8) |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Altman Z-Score is not shown here: it is not populated in the underlying data for any company. Percentages are of companies in each group that report the relevant metric, not of the full group size.
UNP Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
UNP Stock Performance relative to High-Confidence Competitors
UNP Stock Performance relative to Similar-Size Competitors
UNP Stock Performance relative to Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors
5 Best-Performing Tracked Competitors, Trailing 12 Months
| # | Competitor | TTM Share Price Return | vs U.S.A. 500 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Csx Corporation | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 2 | Landbridge Company Llc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 3 | Sunoco Lp | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 4 | Williams companies inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 5 | Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd | 282.9% | Outperformed |
TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Union Pacific's best-performing competitors requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.
Union Pacific's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers
We are subject to competition from other railroads, motor carriers, ship and barge operators, and pipelines. Our main railroad competitor is Burlington Northern Santa Fe LLC. Its primary subsidiary, BNSF Railway Company (BNSF), operates parallel routes in many of our main traffic corridors. In addition, we operate in corridors served by other railroads and motor carriers.
Motor carrier competition exists for five of our six commodity groups (excluding most coal shipments). Because of the proximity of our routes to major inland and Gulf Coast waterways, barges can be particularly competitive, especially for grain and bulk commodities in certain areas where we operate. In addition to price competition, we face competition with respect to transit times, quality and reliability of service from motor carriers and other railroads. Motor carriers in particular can have an advantage over railroads with respect to transit times and timeliness of service.
However, railroads are much more fuel efficient than trucks, which reduces the impact of transporting goods on the environment and public infrastructure, and railroads operating in the U.S., including us, have been making efforts to convert certain traffic from motor carriers to railroad service. Additionally, we must build or acquire and maintain our rail system; trucks and barges are able to use public rights-of-way maintained by public entities. Any of the following could also affect the competitiveness of our transportation services for some or all of our commodities: (i) improvements or expenditures materially increasing the quality or reducing the costs of these alternative modes of transportation, (ii) legislation that eliminates or significantly reduces the size or weight limitations applied to motor carriers, or (iii) legislation or regulatory changes that impose operating restrictions on railroads or that adversely affect the profitability of some or all railroad traffic.
Publicly Traded Peers of Union Pacific Corp
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
 Union Pacific Corp |
180,389.14 | 26,516.00 |
 Csx Corporation |
93,984.16 | 14,942.00 |
 Williams companies inc |
88,775.75 | 12,204.00 |
 Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd |
80,063.45 | 11,543.04 |
 Norfolk Southern Corp |
76,816.85 | 12,963.00 |
 Kinder Morgan Inc |
73,201.49 | 18,344.00 |
| SUBTOTAL | 898,344.42 | 650,208.90 |
Sign in to see all competitors of Union Pacific Corp.
Sources: see Methodology: Peer & Competitor Identification, Sourcing.
Updated on:
Focus of this report: publicly traded companies. Ten additional tables on Union Pacific Corp versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
Union Pacific's Competitors Named by the Company
Competitive relationships identified from Union Pacific reports and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.| Competitor | Basis | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Union Bankshares Inc | Company report | 85% |
| Csx Corporation | Company report | 85% |
| Kansas City Southern | Company report | 85% |
| BNSF Railway Company | Company report | 85% |
| Burlington Northern Santa Fe LLC | Company report | 85% |
| Hub Group Inc | Company report | 85% |
| Norfolk Southern Corp | Company report | 85% |
| Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd | Company report | 85% |
| Berkshire Hathaway Inc | Company report | 85% |
Company report basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Union Pacific's named competitors require a Commercial License.
Methodology: see Methodology: Peer & Competitor Identification, Sourcing.
Union Pacific's Business Segment Mix vs Peers
Revenue by operating segment or division, as named and reported by each company. Segment names are the filer's own and are not standardized across companies. Do not assume a same-named or similarly-named segment is defined identically between two companies. Shares are of each company's own total revenue and are not required to sum to 100% (intersegment revenue, unallocated items).| Company | Largest Segment |
|---|---|
| Union Pacific Corp | Reportable 99.00 % |
| Csx Corporation | Rail 94.35 % |
| Williams companies inc | Transmission, Power & Gulf 47.62 % |
| Norfolk Southern Corp | Railway Operating Revenues Market Group Merchandise 62.05 % |
| Kinder Morgan Inc | Natural Gas Pipelines 63.98 % |
| American Electric Power Co Inc | Vertically Integrated Utilities 57.14 % |
Source: operating segment revenue as reported in each company's reports (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API, leaf-level reportable segments only (parent roll-up segments are excluded where sub-segments are separately disclosed).
Sign in to see all peers for Union Pacific Corp.
Union Pacific's Productivity vs Peers Comparison
Revenue and income per employee, trailing 12 months, in $; market cap in millions of $| Company | Market Cap | Revenue / Employee | Income / Employee |
|---|---|---|---|
| Union Pacific Corp | 180,389 | 905,385 | 260,115 |
| Csx Corporation | 93,984 | 649,652 | 155,696 |
| Williams companies inc | 88,776 | 2,038,417 | 541,841 |
| Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd | 80,063 | 592,589 | 142,885 |
| Norfolk Southern Corp | 76,817 | 671,658 | 139,016 |
| Kinder Morgan Inc | 73,201 | 1,663,402 | 331,248 |
| PEERS TOTAL | 717,955 | 836,183 | 161,328 |
Sign in to see all peers for Union Pacific Corp.
Union Pacific's Geographic Revenue Exposure vs Peers
Revenue by country/region as reported in each company's most recent report. Disclosure granularity varies by filer (some report by country, others by broad region) and is shown as disclosed.| Company | Largest Market |
|---|---|
| Sea Limited | Southeast Asia excluding Singapore 62.69 % |
| Broadridge Financial Solutions Inc | United States 85.26 % |
| Hub Group Inc | US 96.93 % |
Source: revenue geography as reported in each company's reports (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API. Percentages are of that company's own total consolidated revenue for its most recent reported period.
Union Pacific's Position in Industry Market Structure
Market-capitalization share and concentration across all 10 companies in Union Pacific's industry classification, broader than the peer set above. Market cap in millions of $.Union Pacific ranks #1 of 10 companies by market capitalization in its industry, holding 37.05 % of total industry market cap. The industry's Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) is 2,383, indicating a moderately concentrated market structure (see Methodology: Market Structure & Concentration).
| Rank | Company | Market Cap | Industry Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Union Pacific Corp | 179,780 | 37.05 % |
| 2 | Csx Corporation | 94,958 | 19.57 % |
| 3 | Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd | 80,371 | 16.56 % |
| 4 | Norfolk Southern Corp | 76,749 | 15.81 % |
| 5 | Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies Corporation | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 6 | Trinity Industries Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 7 | The Greenbrier Companies Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 8 | Ftai Infrastructure Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 9 | Freightcar America Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 10 | Rail Vision Ltd | 1,234 | 5.2% |
Market cap and industry share for the rest of Union Pacific's industry peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation) across CSIMarket's industry classification, market capitalization as of 2026-11-03.
Union Pacific's Same-Size Peers & Stock Performance
Peers chosen by closeness in market-cap rank within the same industry classification (not the named-competitor list above). Trailing 12-month total return, 3-month price momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio vs the broad U.S. market.| Rank | Company | Market Cap | TTM Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Union Pacific Corp | 179,780 | 37.34 % |
| 2 | Csx Corporation | 94,958 | 41.81 % |
| 3 | Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 4 | Norfolk Southern Corp | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 5 | Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies Corporation | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 6 | Trinity Industries Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
Market cap, return, momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio for the rest of Union Pacific's same-size peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation); returns and risk metrics as of 2026-11-03. Beta and Sharpe ratio are versus the broad U.S. equity market, not this industry.
Union Pacific's Profitability & Cost Structure
Trailing 12-month margins from SEC-filed financials. Operating margin is compared to the Railroads industry median; gross margin, EBITDA margin and capital intensity are compared to the live industry average (19 companies). See the full Railroads industry profitability benchmarks.| Metric | Company | Industry | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 0.80 % | 15.45 % (avg) | -14.7 pp |
| Operating Margin | 0.41 % | industry median | +0.0 pp |
| EBITDA Margin | 0.51 % | 3.41 % (avg) | -2.9 pp |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | 14.46 % | 14.86 % (avg) | -0.4 pp |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. SG&A and R&D as a share of revenue have limited coverage as this data is backfilled and appear only where reported. Higher capital intensity is not inherently negative; it reflects the industry's asset requirements.
Union Pacific's Valuation vs Competitive Position
Valuation multiples vs the Railroads industry average (19 companies, excluding loss-making/negative-equity outliers), alongside returns on capital for context on whether a premium or discount lines up with measurably stronger or weaker returns. See the full Railroads industry valuation benchmarks.| Metric | Company | Industry Average | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| P/E | 22.7x | 26.6x | -3.9x |
| EV / EBITDA | 15.5x | 15.7x | -0.3x |
| P/B | 8.6x | 3.4x | +5.2x |
| Return on Equity | 0.38 % | industry aggregate | -18.36 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 0.22 % | 0.46 % (avg) | -0.24 % |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. A valuation premium or discount is not, by itself, a judgment of over- or under-valuation. Compare it against the return and growth context shown elsewhere on this page.
Union Pacific's Multi-Year Financial Trajectory
Fiscal-year revenue growth, operating margin, return on invested capital and P/E, as reported in company reports.| Metric | 2017 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | 6.51 % | -3.63 % | -10.02 % | 11.63 % | 14.08 % | -3.04 % | 0.54 % | 1.07 % |
| Operating Margin | 37.95 % | 39.40 % | 40.11 % | 42.83 % | 39.87 % | 37.65 % | 40.05 % | 40.17 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 10.90 % | 11.45 % | 10.33 % | 12.73 % | 13.67 % | 11.98 % | 11.10 % | 12.17 % |
| P/E | 9.6x | 21.2x | 25.9x | 24.5x | 18.6x | 21.0x | 21.4x | 19.1x |
Source: CSIMarket API, fiscal-year figures. P/E is this company's own historical ratio at each fiscal year end and can swing sharply around an earnings trough: that is real, not a data error.
Union Pacific's Strategic Group Map
Union Pacific is shown in red; its closest peers by combined growth, margin and ROIC are labeled. See Methodology: Strategic Group Map for how this chart is built.
Union Pacific's trailing-12-month revenue growth of 8.3% and operating margin of 0.4% compares with an average of 8.7% growth and 0.3% margin across its 8 closest peers by combined growth, margin and ROIC -- Union Pacific sits below that peer average on growth and above it on margin.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Extreme outlier values (from near-zero-revenue companies) are excluded from the plotted cloud but never from the highlighted company or its labeled peers.
Union Pacific's BCG Growth-Share Matrix
See Methodology: BCG Growth-Share Matrix for how relative share and growth are calculated and thresholded.
Union Pacific falls in the Cash Cow quadrant: relative market share of 1.89x vs its largest competitor, in an industry growing revenue 5.8% (median, trailing 12 months).
Source: CSIMarket API (market-cap share and industry revenue growth). The 10% growth and 1.0x share lines are standard textbook thresholds, not derived from this industry's own distribution.
Union Pacific's Competitive Forces (Porter's Five Forces)
Only the forces this data can support honestly are shown; the other three are marked as such rather than guessed.| Force | Assessment | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Competitive Rivalry | Moderate | Industry HHI of 2,383 (see Industry Market Structure & Concentration above) |
| Barriers to Entry | Moderate, in line with the industry | Capital intensity (capex / revenue) of 14.46 % vs industry average 14.86 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above) |
Note: see Methodology: Porter's Five Forces. Supplier power and buyer power are covered on Union Pacific's dedicated Suppliers and Customers pages, not here.
Union Pacific's Industry Attractiveness & Competitive Strength
See Methodology: GE/McKinsey Matrix for how the two axes are built.
Union Pacific falls in the Medium attractiveness / Medium strength cell: Selective.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Each axis score is a simple 1(low)/2(medium)/3(high) average across its three inputs -- a transparent, disclosed simplification, not a validated academic scoring model.
Union Pacific's SWOT
Every point below is a fixed rule applied to a metric already shown elsewhere on this page (Market Structure, Profitability, Valuation, Run-Rate, Stock Performance, Quality Breadth) not an independent strategic assessment. A blank quadrant means no rule was met, not that none apply.Strengths
- Market leader by capitalization in its industry (#1 of 10, 37.05 % share).
- Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+9.7% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
- Outperforming the U.S.A. 500 over the trailing 12 months.
Weaknesses
- Return on equity 18.4 points below the industry aggregate.
Opportunities
No rule matched.
Threats
- Tracked peer group's revenue run-rate is broadly decelerating (-5.5% annualized).
Methodology: see Methodology: SWOT Analysis.
Union Pacific's Financial Strength vs Peers Comparison
Quick ratio, working capital, debt to equity and asset turnover, trailing 12 months| Company | Quick Ratio | Working Capital | Debt / Equity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Union Pacific Corp | 0.28 | 1.00 | 1.53 |
| Csx Corporation | - | 0.86 | 2.05 |
| Williams companies inc | - | 0.54 | 1.94 |
| Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd | 0.06 | 0.57 | 0.65 |
| Norfolk Southern Corp | 0.39 | 0.87 | 1.05 |
| Kinder Morgan Inc | 0.06 | 0.57 | 0.99 |
Sign in to see all peers for Union Pacific Corp.
Quick ratio = cash / current liabilities; working capital ratio = current assets / current liabilities; asset turnover = revenue / total assets. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Union Pacific's Revenue and Income Growth vs Peers
Quarterly revenue and net income growth, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Revenue Y/Y | Income Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Union Pacific Corp | Q3 2026 | +16.4 % | +16.1 % |
| Csx Corporation | Q3 2026 | +12.0 % | +51.6 % |
| Williams companies inc | Q2 2026 | +9.8 % | +50.3 % |
| Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd | Q3 2026 | +13.5 % | -1.9 % |
| Norfolk Southern Corp | Q3 2026 | +13.6 % | +6.8 % |
| Kinder Morgan Inc | Q3 2026 | +9.3 % | +16.8 % |
| PEERS TOTAL | +14.8 % | +74.1 % |
Sign in to see all peers for Union Pacific Corp.
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Union Pacific's Peers' Costs of Sales and Capital Expenditures
Context for revenue growth: peer costs and capex, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Costs Y/Y | Capex Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Union Pacific Corp | Q3 2026 | +68.8 % | +7.8 % |
| Csx Corporation | Q3 2026 | +60.5 % | -18.8 % |
| Williams companies inc | Q2 2026 | - | +88.7 % |
| Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd | Q3 2026 | +58.2 % | -33.9 % |
| Norfolk Southern Corp | Q3 2026 | +77.2 % | +6.4 % |
| Kinder Morgan Inc | Q3 2026 | +12.3 % | +31.8 % |
Sign in to see all peers for Union Pacific Corp.
Union Pacific's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Union Pacific Corp | 10.76% | 11.49% | 37.82% |
| Csx Corporation | 8.06% | 6.66% | 25.94% |
| Williams companies inc | 5.53% | 6.55% | 21.49% |
| Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd | 4.35% | 4.15% | 8.12% |
| Norfolk Southern Corp | 5.92% | 6.42% | 16.68% |
| Kinder Morgan Inc | 4.95% | 5.07% | 11.18% |
Sign in to see all peers for Union Pacific Corp.
ROA = net income / total assets; ROI = net income / investments; ROE = net income / equity; turnover ratios use trailing 12 month revenue (receivables) and cost of sales (inventory).
Union Pacific's Valuation vs Peers
P/E, price to sales, PEG, price to cash flow and price to book| Company | P/E | Price / Sales |
|---|---|---|
| Union Pacific Corp | 23.67 | 6.80 |
| Csx Corporation | 26.42 | 6.29 |
| Williams companies inc | 28.87 | 7.27 |
| Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd | 22.81 | 6.94 |
| Norfolk Southern Corp | 28.62 | 5.93 |
| Kinder Morgan Inc | 20.42 | 3.99 |
| PEERS AVERAGE | 7.02 | 1.38 |
Sign in to see all peers for Union Pacific Corp.
P/E = price / diluted EPS (trailing 12 months); PEG = P/E divided by EPS growth; the average row divides the peers' combined market cap by their combined income, sales, cash flow and equity.