NEURACAP
Sector ReportSep 28, 2026 · 22 pages · Free to read

Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Sector Outlook — September 2026

A sector outlook on Outpatient and Specialty Care Services, covering business models, forward valuation, precedent transactions and strategic implications for owners, operators and boards navigating growth, profitability and capacity economics across the peer set.

Download PDFDownload PowerPoint

Key figures

8.7x
Sector Median Multiple
EV/EBITDA (CY2027E), 12 rated companies
13.3x
Premium Tier Median
Top valuation quartile
5.9x
Discount Tier Median
Bottom valuation quartile
77%
Facility-Network Share
Share of approved universe

Read the report

C:\Users\dawoo\OneDrive\Desktop\Deployments\neuracap_sector_reports_fable\Code\NeuraCap_Sector_Report_Pipeline_v2.1.0\ncsr\deck_kit\assets\logo_light_full.png

HEALTH CARE › HEALTH CARE EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES › OUTPATIENT AND SPECIALTY CARE SERVICES

Outpatient and Specialty Care: Value and Quality Move Together

The report shows how operating profiles, business models and buyer priorities separate value across the sector.

September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential

Market data as of 2026-09-28 · primary valuation basis EV / EBITDA (CY2027E)

Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice

1

1 / 22

Executive summary

Outpatient and specialty care splits into a scaled hospital-affiliated core and distinct adjacent models, each priced differently on EV/EBITDA (CY2027E). The premium end of the rated set trades at 13.3x against 5.9x at the discount end, with the widest gap where growth and profitability appear together. Precedent transactions confirm buyers are underwriting several routes to scale, not one. The operating priority for any name is converting growth into durable, capacity-efficient earnings.

Key findings

  • Facility networks form 77% of the sector; adjacent models add 23% distinct exposure.
  • Premium multiples reach 13.3x versus 5.9x at the discount end, a wide valuation gap.
  • Faster-growth names trade at 9.9x versus 8.0x for slower peers, a growth premium.
  • Names clearing both growth and margin bars command 14.7x versus 6.4x for laggards.

What each page shows

The analyst’s walkthrough of the deck, page by page.

  1. 01

    HEALTH CARE › HEALTH CARE EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES › OUTPATIENT AND SPECIALTY CARE SERVICES

    Cover page introducing the Outpatient and Specialty Care Services sector outlook as of September 2026.

    We open with the Outpatient and Specialty Care Services sector outlook as of September 28, 2026, built on EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) as the primary valuation lens. This sets up the argument that follows: value and quality move together across the sector.

    Everything on this page

    HEALTH CARE › HEALTH CARE EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES › OUTPATIENT AND SPECIALTY CARE SERVICES Outpatient and Specialty Care: Value and Quality Move Together The report shows how operating profiles, business models and buyer priorities separate value across the sector. September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Market data as of 2026-09-28 · primary valuation basis EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 1

  2. 02
    CONTENTS

    What This Report Covers

    Contents page listing the report's five numbered sections plus the appendix.

    We lay out five sections — the bottom line, the landscape, valuation and situations, precedent transactions and strategic implications — plus a full appendix. We put the bottom line first, so a client who reads only one section still leaves with the complete story.

    Everything on this page

    CONTENTS What This Report Covers 01 The Bottom Line The Sector Rewards a Narrow Mix of Growth, Profitability and Durable Care Economics 02 The Landscape Business Model Matters Before Company-Level Performance Enters the Comparison 03 Valuation & Situations Forward Earnings Separate the Premium End from the Discount End 04 Precedent Transactions Buyers Have Paid Across Care Delivery, Specialty Networks and Occupational Health 05 Strategic Implications Value Strengthens When Growth Converts into Durable Earnings 06 Appendix Comparables Detail, Methodology, Sources and Assumptions Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 2

  3. 03
    01 · THE BOTTOM LINE

    Outpatient and Specialty Care Contains a Scaled Hospital-Affiliated Core and Distinct Adjacent Models

    This page states the report's central finding: a scaled hospital-affiliated core sits alongside distinct adjacent models.

    We show that outpatient and specialty care splits into a scaled hospital-affiliated core and separate adjacent models, each carrying a different earnings and growth profile. On our primary basis, EV/EBITDA (CY2027E), the premium end of the peer set trades at 13.3x against 5.9x at the discount end. That gap is widest where growth and profitability appear together, and narrower where either is missing. So the operating question for any name in this sector is which side of that split it sits on, and why.

    Everything on this page

    01 · THE BOTTOM LINE Outpatient and Specialty Care Contains a Scaled Hospital-Affiliated Core and Distinct Adjacent Models The full story on one page · figures on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), market data as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (12 of 13 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Qualitative characterisations are NeuraCap views. Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 3 1 The Sector’s Center of Gravity Sits in Facility Networks Hospital-affiliated outpatient and surgical facility networks represent 77% of the set, while adjacent models represent 23%. That mix puts site of service, case mix acuity and physician alignment at the center of the value discussion. 2 The Premium End Carries a Wide Valuation Lead The premium end sits at 13.3x versus 5.9x for the discount end. With a forward EV / EBITDA lens, that gap already credits forecast growth and points to differing market views on durability. 3 Faster Growth Is Associated with Higher Pricing Among the 12 names with a forward EV / EBITDA estimate, the six at or above 6% growth sit at 9.9x versus 8.0x for the six below. The operating test is whether that pace comes with credible same-store visit growth, de novo ramp and payer mix. 4 Clearing Both Operating Bars Marks Out the Top of the Range Among the 12 names with a forward EV / EBITDA estimate, the two clearing both growth and margin bars sit at 14.7x, while the two clearing neither sit at 6.4x. The contrast is consistent with buyers and public investors distinguishing profitable expansion from volume alone. 8.7x Sector median EV/EBITDA CY2027E consensus · 12 rated of 13 companies 13.3x Premium end EV/EBITDA vs 5.9x at the discount end top quartile (n=3) against bottom quartile (n=3) on EV/EBITDA — the spread the report explains 19 Transactions with disclosed terms 56 recorded in this tier · 3 told as case studies, the full list in the appendix

  4. 04
    SECTION 02

    02

    Section divider introducing the market map and landscape review of business models.

    Before comparing companies, we reset on business model: facility networks and adjacent models carry different earnings, payment and growth profiles. So valuation only makes sense once we know which model we are pricing.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 02 02 THE LANDSCAPE Business Model Matters Before Company-Level Performance Enters the Comparison Facility networks and adjacent models carry different earnings, payment and growth profiles. 02 of 06 Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 4

  5. 05
    02 · MARKET MAP

    Facility Networks Hold the Sector’s Center While Adjacent Models Broaden the Opportunity

    This page maps the approved companies by business segment and shows the median EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) for each group.

    We group the approved universe by business segment and take the median EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) for each group. Facility networks hold the center of the sector, while adjacent models broaden where the opportunity sits. Because the groups carry different medians, the segment a company sits in already tells us a lot about how the market is pricing it. So the map is the first filter before any single-company comparison.

    Everything on this page

    02 · MARKET MAP Facility Networks Hold the Sector’s Center While Adjacent Models Broaden the Opportunity 13 approved companies grouped by business segment · median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) per group · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Segment grouping follows the platform's classification; group medians on rated names only. "Why it matters" lines are NeuraCap views. Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 5 HOSPITAL-AFFILIATED OUTPATIENT AND SURGICAL FACILITY NETWORKS 10 cos median 9.1x HCA Healthcare (HCA) Community Health (CYH) Surgery Partners (SGRY) Concentra Group (CON) Option Care Health (OPCH) Astrana Health (ASTH) Ardent Health (ARDT) U.S. Physical (USPH) Innovage Holding (INNV) The Joint (JYNT) This group represents 77% of the set and brings site-of-service economics, physician syndication and local referral density into focus. ADJACENT MODELS 3 cos median 7.0x National Vision (EYE) Alignment (ALHC) PROCEPT (PRCT) This group represents 23% of the set and adds distinct payment models, technology exposure and care formats.

  6. 06
    02 · LANDSCAPE

    Outpatient and Specialty Care: Two Models with Two Different Mixes of Growth and Margin

    This page compares the two dominant models on their growth and margin mix, using EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) medians on rated names.

    We set the two models side by side and show how their growth and margin mixes differ, with EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) medians calculated on rated names only. The contrast is not just which model is bigger — it is which mix of growth and margin the market is willing to pay for. So the choice of model shapes the valuation conversation before any company-specific catalyst does.

    Everything on this page

    02 · LANDSCAPE Outpatient and Specialty Care: Two Models with Two Different Mixes of Growth and Margin Segment view of the approved universe · EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) medians on rated names · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. "What they do / why it matters" is a NeuraCap view. Full company-level detail in the appendix and companion tables. Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 6 Segment n Share of universe Median EV/EBITDA Names to know What they do — and why it matters Hospital-affiliated outpatient and surgical facility networks 10 77% 9.1x HCA Healthcare, Inc. (HCA) · Community Health Systems, Inc. (CYH) · +8 more Scale meets local care delivery. These networks combine facilities, clinicians and referral channels. Value depends on case mix acuity, block time utilization, payer contracts and the economics retained after physician interests. Adjacent models 3 23% 7.0x National Vision Holdings, Inc. (EYE) · Alignment Healthcare, Inc. (ALHC) · +1 more Different economics widen the frame. These businesses span risk-bearing care and procedure technology. Their revenue quality, margin maturity and capital needs differ from facility-led operators.

  7. 07
    SECTION 03

    03

    Section divider introducing forward valuation and the drivers that separate the premium from the discount end.

    We now turn to forward earnings, where the range between the premium and discount ends reflects different combinations of growth, profitability and operating durability. So the next pages test what actually explains that spread.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 03 03 VALUATION & SITUATIONS Forward Earnings Separate the Premium End from the Discount End The range reflects different combinations of growth, profitability and operating durability. 03 of 06 Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 7

  8. 08
    03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION

    The Premium End Holds a Clear Lead, but Its Operating Profiles Differ

    This page ranks all 12 rated companies by EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) against a sector median of 8.7x.

    We sort all 12 rated companies by EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) against a sector median of 8.7x. The premium end holds a clear lead, but the names inside it do not share one operating profile. That distinction matters because a shared multiple tier can still hide different underlying economics. So the next pages unpack what is actually driving that premium.

    Everything on this page

    03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION The Premium End Holds a Clear Lead, but Its Operating Profiles Differ EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) · all 12 rated companies, sorted descending · sector median 8.7x · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (12 of 13 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Tier zones are NeuraCap groupings cut at the rated set's quartiles; every multiple quoted on this page is a median on the same EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) basis. Panel commentary is a NeuraCap view. Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 8 PREMIUM · median 13.3x CORE · median 8.7x DISCOUNT · median 5.9x Sector median 8.7x WHAT SEPARATES THE TWO ENDS The valuation gap is clear. The premium end sits at 13.3x, while the discount end sits at 5.9x. The spread is observed across a small set with different care models and operating profiles. The premium profiles differ. The premium end includes balanced and margin-led profiles. That mix suggests investors are considering durability alongside the headline rate of growth. Forward pricing tests durability. A forward multiple already gives credit for forecast performance. Holding a premium on that basis is associated with confidence that earnings can persist.

  9. 09
    03 · VALUATION DRIVERS

    Profitability Separates the Two Ends: Names Above the 11% Margin Line Carry 10.9x Against 8.2x Below It

    This page splits the rated set by growth and margin cohorts and shows the EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) median for each.

    We split the rated set at its own median growth rate and margin level, then take the EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) median for each cohort. Names above the 11% margin line carry 10.9x against 8.2x below it, and faster-growth names trade at 9.9x against 8.0x for slower peers. These are associations we observe in the data, not claims of cause and effect. So profitability and growth both track with valuation, and neither the report nor the market treats them as guaranteed outcomes.

    Everything on this page

    03 · VALUATION DRIVERS Profitability Separates the Two Ends: Names Above the 11% Margin Line Carry 10.9x Against 8.2x Below It Median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) by revenue-growth cohort and by EBITDA-margin cohort (each split at its covered median) · rated names with estimates · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Cohort medians on rated names with the required estimates (faster n=6; slower n=6; higher-margin n=6; lower-margin n=6). Driver readings are NeuraCap views on the supplied data — association, not causation. Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 9 EV/EBITDA, median per cohort · growth split at 6% · EBITDA-margin split at 11% The Growth Split Carries a Visible Valuation Difference Among the 12 names with a forward EV / EBITDA estimate, the six at or above 6% growth sit at 9.9x versus 8.0x for the six below. Revenue Quality Gives Growth Its Commercial Meaning Same-store visit growth, net revenue per case and payer mix distinguish repeatable operating progress from growth that depends on acquisitions or a still-ramping site base. Physician Economics Shape the Earnings Available to Owners For syndicated facilities, reported earnings and parent-level economics can diverge. Physician alignment may support retention while minority interests affect the value accruing to shareholders.

  10. 10
    03 · SITUATION MAP

    Growth and Margin Sort the Set into Four Operating Groups, and Valuation Varies Across Them

    This page sorts the rated set into four operating groups by growth versus the covered median and valuation versus the sector median.

    We cut the rated set on EV/EBITDA against the sector median of 8.7x and on revenue growth against the covered median of 6%, producing four operating groups. This is a description of where each name sits today, not a recommendation to buy or sell. So the map gives us a shared vocabulary for the situation-specific questions that follow.

    Everything on this page

    03 · SITUATION MAP Growth and Margin Sort the Set into Four Operating Groups, and Valuation Varies Across Them Cut on EV / EBITDA vs the sector median (8.7x) (rows) and revenue growth vs the covered median (6%) (columns) · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Situation boundaries are the cohort's own medians (Directional, NeuraCap view). This page characterises situations; it does not recommend buying or selling any security. Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 10 Higher Valuation, Higher Growth Above-median multiple · above-median revenue growth 4 names Concentra Group Holdings Parent, Inc. (CON) · Option Care Health, Inc. (OPCH) · U.S. Physical Therapy, Inc. (USPH) · +1 more Four names sit above the middle of the peer set on both valuation and revenue growth. Their position pairs current operating momentum with stronger market confidence. Higher Valuation, Lower Growth Above-median multiple · below-median revenue growth 2 names HCA Healthcare, Inc. (HCA) · Surgery Partners, Inc. (SGRY) Two names carry an above-middle valuation despite below-middle revenue growth. Their position suggests that profitability, durability or business-model attributes are also present in market pricing. Lower Valuation, Higher Growth Below-median multiple · above-median revenue growth 2 names Astrana Health, Inc. (ASTH) · Alignment Healthcare, Inc. (ALHC) Two names deliver above-middle revenue growth while remaining below the middle on valuation. The gap frames questions around margin conversion, revenue quality and confidence in the growth path. Lower Valuation, Lower Growth Below-median multiple · below-median revenue growth 4 names Community Health Systems, Inc. (CYH) · Ardent Health Inc. (ARDT) · National Vision Holdings, Inc. (EYE) · +1 more Four names sit below the middle on both measures. Their operating questions center on growth recovery, cost structure, payer mix and capital allocation.

  11. 11
    03 · GROWTH VS PROFITABILITY

    The Top of the Range Sits with the Names Clearing Both Operating Bars

    This page plots growth against margin for the 12 companies with both estimates and shows the median EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) per quadrant.

    We plot revenue growth against EBITDA margin for the 12 companies with both estimates, cutting at the covered medians of 6% growth and 11% margin. The names clearing both bars carry a median of 14.7x, while the names clearing neither sit at 6.4x. That contrast is consistent with the market rewarding profitable expansion more than volume alone. So the quadrant a name occupies is a useful starting point for what its next move should address.

    Everything on this page

    03 · GROWTH VS PROFITABILITY The Top of the Range Sits with the Names Clearing Both Operating Bars Revenue growth (CY2027E, x-axis) vs EBITDA margin (CY2027E, y-axis) · 12 companies with both estimates · cuts at the covered medians (6% growth, 11% margin) · median EV/EBITDA per quadrant · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Quadrant cuts are the covered set's medians. Quadrant medians on names with a meaningful EV/EBITDA (balanced n=2; margin-only n=4; growth-only n=4; neither n=2). ALHC plotted at the chart edge. Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 11 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 5% 10% 15% 20% MARGIN ONLY median 8.5x BALANCED median 14.7x NEITHER median 6.4x GROWTH ONLY median 8.7x SGRY CYH JYNT HCA ARDT EYE CON OPCH USPH INNV ASTH ALHC x: revenue growth (CY2027E) · y: EBITDA margin (CY2027E) HOW TO READ THIS Among the 12 names with a forward EV / EBITDA estimate, two clear both bars at 14.7x, four clear only the margin bar at 8.5x, four clear only the growth bar at 8.7x and two clear neither at 6.4x. Concentra Group Holdings Parent, Inc. (CON) and U.S. Physical Therapy, Inc. (USPH) occupy the balanced group. The middle groups show that growth or profitability alone can support value without creating the same position. Rule of 40 (revenue growth + EBITDA margin ≥ 40%): 0 of 12 names clear it.

  12. 12
    03 · THE AGENDA

    Operating Priorities Depend on Whether Growth or Profitability Is the Constraint

    This page frames the operating priorities an owner or acquirer should resolve, based on whether growth or profitability is the binding constraint.

    We frame the agenda as a set of questions rather than a verdict: is growth or profitability the binding constraint for a given name? These are observations grounded in the cohort data shown earlier, not recommendations. So the next step for any operator is to locate which constraint applies before choosing where to invest.

    Everything on this page

    03 · THE AGENDA Operating Priorities Depend on Whether Growth or Profitability Is the Constraint NeuraCap view · framed as the questions an owner or acquirer should resolve · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All content on this page is Directional — NeuraCap advisory judgment grounded in the cohort data shown earlier. It does not constitute investment advice. Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 12 Protect Profitable Growth Test whether expansion preserves mature-site economics, clinician productivity and payer mix while new capacity ramps. What changes the answer: Same-store performance remains resilient as de novo sites and acquired locations mature. Convert Growth into Earnings Examine pricing, case mix, labor deployment and site maturity where revenue growth has yet to translate into stronger profitability. What changes the answer: Incremental revenue begins to carry a more durable contribution after clinician and site costs. Restart the Growth Engine Assess whether block time, referral funnels, provider capacity or contracted rates are limiting otherwise profitable operations. What changes the answer: Available capacity and clinician coverage can support additional cases or visits. Rework the Operating Model Review market density, service mix, fixed costs and build-versus-buy choices where growth and profitability both trail the peer set. What changes the answer: A focused market or service-line plan offers a credible route to better unit economics.

  13. 13
    SECTION 04

    04

    Section divider introducing the precedent transaction record across care delivery, specialty networks and occupational health.

    We move to the transaction record, where buyers have paid across care delivery, specialty networks and occupational health. So the deal data tests whether strategic and financial buyers are underwriting the same routes to scale that public markets reward.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 04 04 PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS Buyers Have Paid Across Care Delivery, Specialty Networks and Occupational Health The transaction record shows strategic and financial buyers underwriting distinct routes to scale. 04 of 06 Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 13

  14. 14
    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES

    Precedent Transactions Spread Across Several Routes to Care Delivery Scale

    This page tells three case studies from the 19 precedent transactions with disclosed terms, using multiples on LTM financials at announcement.

    We walk through three case studies drawn from 19 precedent transactions with disclosed terms, each priced on LTM financials at announcement. The record spreads across several routes to care delivery scale rather than one dominant path. These deal multiples are not directly comparable to our CY2027E public-market basis, so we draw no spread between them. So the pattern of who is buying, and why, tells us as much as any single multiple does.

    Everything on this page

    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES Precedent Transactions Spread Across Several Routes to Care Delivery Scale 3 of 19 transactions with disclosed terms, told as case studies · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · the complete list is in the appendix · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 69 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate filings collapsed); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 37 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. "Why the deal happened" is a NeuraCap read of the recorded evidence. Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 14 Feb-2023 $10.2B CVS Health Corporation CVS Health Corporation’s agreement to acquire Oak Street Health, Inc. brought care delivery into a… EV / LTM revenue 4.7x EV / LTM EBITDA n/a WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED The combination suggests that CVS Health Corporation saw strategic value in adding a care delivery organization. It aligns with payer and healthcare buyers seeking closer links to patient capacity. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED The announced value was $10.2B at 4.7x EV / Revenue. That revenue benchmark is more relevant to a model whose earnings profile is still developing than a direct comparison with the sector’s lead EV / EBITDA lens. Jan-2025 $6.2B Bain Capital Private Equity, LP Bain Capital Private Equity, LP’s agreement to acquire Surgery Partners, Inc. put a scaled surgical… EV / LTM revenue 2.0x EV / LTM EBITDA 12.3x WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED The transaction suggests sponsor conviction in the cash earnings and expansion potential of a surgical facility platform. The strategic fit centers on a scaled network where site of service, case mix and physician alignment matter. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED The announced value was $6.2B at 12.3x EV / EBITDA and 2.0x EV / Revenue. The earnings measure benchmarks directly against the peer set’s lead lens, subject to transaction timing and adjustment differences. Jan-2025 $265M Concentra Group Holdings Concentra Group Holdings added Nova Medical Centers to deepen its occupational care network. EV / LTM revenue n/a EV / LTM EBITDA 9.4x WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED The combination suggests a network-density strategy within occupational care. Greater local coverage can sit alongside employer relationships, clinician capacity and referral access. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED The completed transaction carried a value of $265M at 9.4x EV / EBITDA. That measure benchmarks directly against the peer set’s lead lens, with transaction structure and earnings adjustments kept in view.

  15. 15
    SECTION 05

    05

    Section divider introducing the strategic implications of converting growth into durable earnings.

    We turn last to what converts growth into durable earnings: revenue quality, capacity use, payer mix and repeatable expansion. So the closing section turns the valuation evidence into an operating agenda.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 05 05 STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS Value Strengthens When Growth Converts into Durable Earnings The operating agenda centers on revenue quality, capacity use, payer mix and repeatable expansion. 05 of 06 Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 15

  16. 16
    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS

    Durable Earnings Sit with Better Revenue Quality and Capacity Economics

    This page sets out the questions on revenue quality and capacity economics that the data puts in front of owners, operators and boards over the next twelve months.

    We translate the valuation evidence into an operating agenda: whether growth is same-store or acquired, whether capacity is converting into repeatable contribution, and whether capital allocation matches the actual constraint. These are directional views grounded in the analysis shown earlier, not recommendations. So the practical next step differs by seat — owner, operator or board — but the underlying question is the same: does the earnings profile hold up under scrutiny?

    Everything on this page

    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS Durable Earnings Sit with Better Revenue Quality and Capacity Economics NeuraCap view · the questions this data puts on the table for the next twelve months Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. This page is Directional — NeuraCap views drawn from the analysis in this report. Observations, not recommendations. Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 16 FOR OWNERS Know Which Economics Support the Company’s Standing The relevant questions are whether growth is same-store or acquired, whether payer mix supports durable rates and whether physician interests leave sufficient earnings at the parent. FOR OPERATORS Turn Capacity into Repeatable Contribution Block time utilization, clinician productivity, credentialing and de novo ramp determine whether demand becomes profitable case and visit growth. FOR BOARDS Match Capital Allocation to the Constraint Build-versus-buy choices should reflect whether the binding issue is local density, clinician supply, service mix, payer positioning or site maturity.

  17. 17
    SECTION 06

    06

    Section divider introducing the full comparables universe, methodology and sources.

    We close with the full universe, the methodology and where every underlying disclosure lives. So a client can trace any figure in this report back to its source.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 06 06 APPENDIX The Full Universe, Methodology and Sources Comparables detail behind every figure in the body, the valuation basis, and where each underlying disclosure lives. 06 of 06 Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 17

  18. 18
    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 1)

    Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier

    This appendix page lists all 12 rated public comparables on EV/EBITDA (CY2027E), grouped by valuation tier against the 8.7x sector median.

    We list all 12 rated comparables on EV/EBITDA (CY2027E), shaded above and below the sector median of 8.7x, alongside the one name without an eligible multiple. Every ticker links to its underlying source. So this page is the full backup for every multiple used earlier in the deck.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 1) Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier Teal shading marks a EV/EBITDA above the sector median (8.7x); amber marks below · 12 rated companies; 1 not rated (no eligible EV/EBITDA) · tickers link to the underlying source · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All 12 rated rows are in this appendix and in the companion workbook, which carries the complete field set. Names without an eligible multiple are listed in the companion workbook. Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 18 Company Ticker Segment EV EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) Rev growth EBITDA margin Rule of 40 PREMIUM — ≥11.2x · median 13.3x · 3 companies U.S. Physical Therapy, Inc. USPH Hospital-affiliated outpatient and surgical facility… $2.0B 16.8x 8% 13% 20 Surgery Partners, Inc. SGRY Hospital-affiliated outpatient and surgical facility… $7.5B 13.3x -1% 17% 16 Concentra Group Holdings Parent, Inc. CON Hospital-affiliated outpatient and surgical facility… $6.6B 12.6x 6% 21% 27 CORE — 7.8x–11.2x · median 8.7x · 6 companies Innovage Holding Corp. INNV Hospital-affiliated outpatient and surgical facility… $1.2B 10.7x 8% 10% 18 HCA Healthcare, Inc. HCA Hospital-affiliated outpatient and surgical facility… $148B 9.1x 4% 20% 24 Option Care Health, Inc. OPCH Hospital-affiliated outpatient and surgical facility… $4.7B 9.0x 7% 8% 15 Astrana Health, Inc. ASTH Hospital-affiliated outpatient and surgical facility… $2.6B 8.3x 10% 7% 17 National Vision Holdings, Inc. EYE Retail-format optometry and vision clinics $1.9B 8.1x 5% 11% 16 Community Health Systems, Inc. CYH Hospital-affiliated outpatient and surgical facility… $10.7B 7.9x 1% 12% 13 DISCOUNT — <7.8x · median 5.9x · 3 companies The Joint Corp. JYNT Hospital-affiliated outpatient and surgical facility… $97M 7.4x 3% 21% 24 Alignment Healthcare, Inc. ALHC Adjacent: risk-bearing payer-provider organizations $1.2B 5.9x 25% 3% 28 Ardent Health Inc. ARDT Hospital-affiliated outpatient and surgical facility… $2.4B 4.6x 4% 8% 12

  19. 19
    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 2)

    All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First

    This appendix page lists precedent transactions with disclosed terms, newest first, the first of two pages.

    We list the transactions with disclosed terms, newest first, out of the total recorded in this tier. Deal values link to the underlying filing, and multiples are LTM at announcement rather than the CY2027E basis used elsewhere. So this is the primary record a client can check for any transaction cited in the case studies.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 2) All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 19 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (56 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 69 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate filings collapsed); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 37 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. 18 of 19 transactions shown; the rest are in the companion workbook. Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 19 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters Jan-2025 Bain Capital Private Equity, LP → Surgery Partners, Inc. $6.2B 2.0x 12.3x Bain Capital Private Equity, LP agreed to acquire Surgery Partners, Inc. The transaction suggests continued financial-buyer interest in scaled surgical facility networks. Jan-2025 Concentra Group Holdings → Nova Medical Centers $265M n/a 9.4x Concentra Group Holdings completed its acquisition of Nova Medical Centers. The combination suggests value in expanding an occupational care network. Nov-2024 Cencora, Inc. → Retina Consultants of America $4.6B n/a n/a Cencora, Inc. completed its acquisition of Retina Consultants of America. The transaction links a healthcare strategic with a specialty care network. Jul-2024 Concentra Group Holdings Parent, Inc. → U.S. Occmed Holdings, LLC d/b/a Nova Medical Centers n/a n/a 9.4x Concentra Group Holdings Parent, Inc. completed its acquisition of U.S. Occmed Holdings, LLC d/b/a Nova Medical Centers. The fit suggests an emphasis on network density and care delivery scale. Feb-2023 CVS Health Corporation → Oak Street Health, Inc. $10.2B 4.7x n/a CVS Health Corporation agreed to acquire Oak Street Health, Inc. The combination suggests interest in bringing care delivery capacity closer to a broader healthcare model. Nov-2022 Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc. → Summit Health-CityMD n/a 3.1x n/a Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc. agreed to acquire Summit Health-CityMD. The transaction pairs a healthcare strategic with a broad care delivery network. Jul-2021 1Life Healthcare Inc. → Iora Health, Inc. n/a 9.5x n/a 1Life Healthcare Inc. agreed to acquire Iora Health, Inc. The transaction suggests a strategic fit between two care delivery organizations. Jun-2021 DFP Healthcare Acquisitions Corp. → TOI Parent, Inc. $842M n/a n/a DFP Healthcare Acquisitions Corp. agreed to acquire TOI Parent, Inc. The transaction connected specialty care delivery with a public-market route. Feb-2021 Fortress Value Acquisition Corp. II → ATI Physical Therapy, Inc. n/a n/a 18.2x Fortress Value Acquisition Corp. II agreed to acquire ATI Physical Therapy, Inc. The transaction suggests interest in a scaled outpatient therapy network.

  20. 20
    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (2 OF 2)

    All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First

    This appendix page continues the list of precedent transactions with disclosed terms, newest first, the second of two pages.

    We continue the same list of disclosed-terms transactions, newest first, completing the record shown on the previous page. Multiples here remain LTM at announcement, not directly comparable to the CY2027E public-market basis used in the valuation sections. So together these two pages give the complete disclosed-terms record behind the deal commentary.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (2 OF 2) All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 19 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (56 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 69 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate filings collapsed); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 37 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. 18 of 19 transactions shown; the rest are in the companion workbook. Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 20 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters Dec-2020 USPI Holding Company, Inc. → portfolio of up to 45 ambulatory surgical centers $1.1B n/a n/a Nov-2018 TPG Capital → Greencross n/a n/a 10.0x Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Oct-2017 Select Medical Holdings Corporation → U.S. HealthWorks, Inc. n/a n/a 12.0x Jan-2017 Mars, Incorporated → VCA Inc. n/a n/a 18.3x Feb-2016 OMERS → Forefront Dermatology n/a n/a 15.0x Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Jan-2016 Select Medical Holdings Corporation → Physiotherapy Associates Holdings, Inc. n/a n/a 12.5x Jun-2014 Surgery Partners, Inc. → Symbion Inc. n/a n/a 10.3x May-2012 DaVita Inc. → Health Care Partners Medical Group, P.C. n/a 1.3x n/a Feb-2011 Kindred Healthcare, Inc. → RehabCare Group, Inc. n/a n/a 7.7x

  21. 21
    06 · METHODOLOGY

    Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality

    This appendix page explains the report's sources, valuation basis and data-quality exclusions.

    We show how this report was built: the valuation basis, what was excluded and where each underlying disclosure sits. Every figure in the body links back to the record it was taken from, and where no link exists, the appendix names the source and the basis used. So a client can verify any number in this deck against its original filing or estimate.

    Everything on this page

    06 · METHODOLOGY Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality How this report was built, what was excluded, and where every underlying disclosure lives · as of 2026-09-28 Every figure in this report links to the record it was taken from. Where a figure has no link, the appendix names its source and the basis on which it was read. Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice 21 VALUATION BASIS Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (12 of 13 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). EV / EBITDA on CY2027E is the lead convention: it is the sector-appropriate prior for Outpatient and Specialty Care Services and it clears the coverage gate with 12 of 13 companies (92%). EV / Revenue, P / E are carried as a cross-check. The set earns: 12 of the 13 companies with a reported forward EBITDA carry a meaningful one, so the profit multiple leads and a revenue multiple would understate what the market is pricing. DATA QUALITY & EXCLUSIONS 14 records were excluded or quarantined by the platform's validation gates (unit errors, implausible ratios, ineligible securities and classification failures); the full ledger ships in the companion tables and never feeds a statistic in this report. DEFINITIVE VS DIRECTIONAL Definitive content is disclosed or consensus data passed through stated arithmetic. Directional content — tier boundaries, situation cuts, "why it matters" commentary, the agenda pages — is NeuraCap analyst judgment and is labeled as such where it appears. WHAT THIS REPORT IS NOT This report characterises a sector. It does not recommend buying, selling or holding any security, and no statement in it should be read as investment advice or a price target. WHERE THE DATA LIVES 609 registered source documents stand behind the figures in this report. Metric hyperlinks throughout the deck open the specific filing or data record; by publisher: sec.gov (608) · home.treasury.gov (1). The companion workbook beside this deck carries the complete source index.

  22. 22

    The Premium Sits with Durable Growth, Profitability and Credible Care Economics.

    Closing page restates that valuation premium sits with durable growth, profitability and credible care economics.

    The premium in this sector sits with durable growth, profitability and credible care economics. The companion tables carry the full universe, exclusion ledger and source index for any figure a client wants to trace further.

    Everything on this page

    The Premium Sits with Durable Growth, Profitability and Credible Care Economics. NeuraCap AI — Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Outpatient and Specialty Care Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 22

Sources and methodology

This report covers Outpatient and Specialty Care Services (Health Care › Health Care Equipment and Services › Outpatient and Specialty Care Services) with market data and consensus estimates as of September 28, 2026. The company universe is the 13 listed companies whose core business is Outpatient and Specialty Care Services according to NeuraCap's industry classification of each company's reported business segments (a company is included only when this industry is central to what it does, not merely adjacent to it). Companies in the set: Alignment Healthcare, Inc. (ALHC), Ardent Health Inc. (ARDT), Astrana Health, Inc. (ASTH), Concentra Group Holdings Parent, Inc. (CON), Community Health Systems, Inc. (CYH), National Vision Holdings, Inc. (EYE), HCA Healthcare, Inc. (HCA), Innovage Holding Corp. (INNV), The Joint Corp. (JYNT), Option Care Health, Inc. (OPCH), PROCEPT BioRobotics Corporation (PRCT), Surgery Partners, Inc. (SGRY), U.S. Physical Therapy, Inc. (USPH). The market map groups them by business vertical — Hospital-affiliated outpatient and surgical facility networks: 10 companies (HCA, CYH, SGRY, CON, OPCH, ASTH, ARDT, USPH, INNV, JYNT); Adjacent models: 3 companies (EYE, ALHC, PRCT). 12 of the 13 companies carry a valid multiple on the primary valuation basis and form the rated set behind every cohort statistic; the others are shown but do not enter the statistics.

Scope and company universe

This report covers Outpatient and Specialty Care Services (Health Care › Health Care Equipment and Services › Outpatient and Specialty Care Services) with market data and consensus estimates as of September 28, 2026. The company universe is the 13 listed companies whose core business is Outpatient and Specialty Care Services according to NeuraCap's industry classification of each company's reported business segments (a company is included only when this industry is central to what it does, not merely adjacent to it). Companies in the set: Alignment Healthcare, Inc. (ALHC), Ardent Health Inc. (ARDT), Astrana Health, Inc. (ASTH), Concentra Group Holdings Parent, Inc. (CON), Community Health Systems, Inc. (CYH), National Vision Holdings, Inc. (EYE), HCA Healthcare, Inc. (HCA), Innovage Holding Corp. (INNV), The Joint Corp. (JYNT), Option Care Health, Inc. (OPCH), PROCEPT BioRobotics Corporation (PRCT), Surgery Partners, Inc. (SGRY), U.S. Physical Therapy, Inc. (USPH). The market map groups them by business vertical — Hospital-affiliated outpatient and surgical facility networks: 10 companies (HCA, CYH, SGRY, CON, OPCH, ASTH, ARDT, USPH, INNV, JYNT); Adjacent models: 3 companies (EYE, ALHC, PRCT). 12 of the 13 companies carry a valid multiple on the primary valuation basis and form the rated set behind every cohort statistic; the others are shown but do not enter the statistics.

What was excluded and why

14 records failed a validation gate and never feed a statistic in this report (14 excluded from aggregate). Each exclusion, with its reason: ALHC — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · ALHC — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · CYH — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · CYH — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · INNV — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · JYNT — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · PRCT — EBITDA is non-positive; EV/EBITDA is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · PRCT — EBITDA is non-positive; EV/EBITDA is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · PRCT — EBITDA is non-positive; EV/EBITDA is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · PRCT — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · PRCT — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · PRCT — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · PRCT — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · SGRY — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate)

Primary valuation basis and how it was chosen

Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (12 of 13 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). EV / EBITDA on CY2027E is the lead convention: it is the sector-appropriate prior for Outpatient and Specialty Care Services and it clears the coverage gate with 12 of 13 companies (92%). EV / Revenue, P / E are carried as a cross-check. The set earns: 12 of the 13 companies with a reported forward EBITDA carry a meaningful one, so the profit multiple leads and a revenue multiple would understate what the market is pricing. The basis is selected in two steps: the industry's customary valuation conventions set the order of preference, and each convention is then tested for coverage — the share of companies with a valid, plausibility-checked multiple on the chosen period. A convention is used only when enough companies carry it; the best-covered convention is used, and disclosed, when none clears the threshold. Coverage measured for this report — EV / EBITDA: 12 of 13 companies; EV / rEVenue: 13 of 13 companies; P/E: 11 of 13 companies. 1 company shows a non-meaningful EV / EBITDA denominator and is excluded from that statistic. 2 companies show a non-meaningful P / E denominator and are excluded from that statistic.

How the multiples and statistics are computed

Enterprise value (EV) is market capitalisation at the as-of date plus total debt minus cash and equivalents from the latest reported balance sheet, reconciled against the platform's stored value and disclosed where the two differ. Forward multiples divide EV (or the share price for P/E) by the consensus estimate for the stated calendar period; trailing multiples use the last twelve months of reported figures from SEC filings. A multiple with a negative or immaterial denominator is treated as not meaningful and excluded from every statistic. Cohort statistics are medians and quartiles over the rated set only; a group median with fewer than three observations is shown as the single company's figure and labelled as such. Valuation tiers cut the rated set at its quartiles (tiers cut at the rated set's quartiles: Premium ≥11.2x, Core 7.8x–11.2x, Discount <7.8x — NeuraCap groupings). Revenue growth compares consecutive calendar-year consensus revenue; EBITDA margin divides consensus EBITDA by consensus revenue for the same period. Figures shown in this report and the calculation behind each: 8.7x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) (12 rated companies) · 13.3x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within Premium tier (n=3) · 8.7x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within Core tier (n=6) · 5.9x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within Discount tier (n=3) · 9.9x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) | growth ≥ 6% (n=6) · 8.0x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) | growth < 6% (n=6) · 10.9x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) | EBITDA margin ≥ 11% (n=6) · 8.2x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) | EBITDA margin < 11% (n=6) · 17% = median Rule of 40 score (revenue growth + EBITDA margin) (n=12) · 14.7x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within balanced quadrant (n=2) · 8.5x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within marginOnly quadrant (n=4) · 8.7x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within growthOnly quadrant (n=4) · 6.4x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within neither quadrant (n=2)

Precedent transactions: what is in the record and why

The precedent record holds the M&A transactions in Outpatient and Specialty Care Services recorded from SEC filings (8-K announcements and the documents they reference), newest first, with each value and multiple linked to the exact passage in the filing that states it. 56 transactions were recorded for this industry; 19 are shown. 37 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted because they say nothing about price; they remain in the companion workbook. Deal multiples are enterprise value over the target's last-twelve-month revenue or EBITDA at announcement, as disclosed; they are not restated to the public basis and no spread to the public multiples is claimed. Before a transaction reaches the record it passes a screen for mirrored or duplicate filings of the same deal, for divestitures where the filer is the seller rather than the buyer, for carve-outs recorded under the parent's name, and for values whose citation describes something other than the price paid (a debt raise, a termination fee); such records are corrected or excluded and the correction is noted. Data-quality notes on this record: 29 × deal value unit unresolved; 32 × no evidence record; 3 × duplicate precedent id; 1 × duplicate filings collapsed; 2 × divestiture roles reassigned; 2 × financial target ev not meaningful. Case studies lead with the 3 richest stories — disclosed value, a readable multiple, newest first.

Sources

Company financials and transaction terms come from the companies' own SEC filings on EDGAR (10-K, 10-Q and 8-K documents), linked from each figure in the report. Forward figures are analyst consensus estimates for the calendar periods shown. Share prices and market capitalisations are market data as of September 28, 2026. Treasury yields are published by the U.S. Department of the Treasury. 613 source documents stand behind this report; by publisher domain: sec.gov, home.treasury.gov (1). Every figure on every page is traceable to one of these records; nothing in the report is derived from outside data.

Interpretation and important notice

Tier labels, situation maps, the agenda and the implications pages are NeuraCap analytical views drawn from the recorded evidence and are labelled as such. The report is informational: it is not investment advice, not a recommendation to buy or sell any security, not an opinion of value and not an offer of any kind. Readers should perform their own diligence before acting on anything described here.

This report is published for information only. It is not a recommendation to buy or sell any security, an offer or solicitation, an appraisal or a fairness opinion, and no fiduciary relationship is created by reading it. Multiples that fail NeuraCap’s plausibility gates are excluded and never plotted. See the full methodology and the disclaimer.

More coverage in Health Care

Want this analysis for a company in Outpatient and Specialty Care Services?

Company valuation reports run the same method against a single business — public or private.

Get your reportTalk to advisory