See Bull Run's current company pages for Aster DM Quality Care and Fortis Healthcare. Fortis can also be compared with Bull Run's Apollo Hospitals vs Fortis Healthcare and Max Healthcare vs Fortis Healthcare.

Q1 FY27: almost the same revenue, EBITDA and market value

The corporate identity changed after the quarter ended

That creates an accounting complication.

Q1 FY27 ended on June 30.

So statutory reported results for the listed entity primarily reflect the legacy Aster business.

The Quality Care combination became legally effective one day later.

Management therefore published combined pro-forma Q1 figures to show what the enlarged operating platform would have looked like during the quarter.

For current investors, the pro-forma numbers are economically more useful

The stock investors own today includes the enlarged post-merger share base and business platform.

Comparing today's market capitalisation only with old Aster's pre-merger Q1 EBITDA would materially misrepresent current operating scale.

Bull Run therefore uses:

• combined pro-forma revenue;
• combined operating EBITDA;
• combined occupancy;
• combined net debt;
• post-merger market capitalisation;

for the strategic comparison with Fortis.

But statutory figures still matter

Legacy Aster reported Q1 revenue of approximately ₹1,311 crore.

Statutory attributable profit was sharply affected by approximately ₹114 crore of merger-related exceptional costs.

That is why Bull Run's standardized trailing P/E currently appears above 200x.

It should not be interpreted as if the enlarged group normally earns only the statutory Q1 profit reported by legacy Aster.

Aster and Fortis are virtually tied on operating profit

Aster combined operating EBITDA was ₹576 crore.

Fortis consolidated operating EBITDA before ESOP was ₹568 crore.

The difference is only ₹8 crore.

Their operating margins are similarly close:

• Aster: 22.2%;
• Fortis: 22.3%.

This is about as close as two large listed hospital companies can get.

Yet the businesses underneath those margins look very different

Aster DM Quality Care now includes four major hospital brands:

• Aster DM;
• CARE Hospitals;
• KIMSHEALTH;
• Evercare.

The enlarged platform operates across 39 hospitals, 28 cities and nine states under current company disclosures.

It has more than 10,000 beds of stated capacity.

Fortis has fewer reported beds but higher current utilisation

Fortis reported more than 6,150 operational beds including approximately 1,200 O&M beds.

Hospital occupancy was around 69%.

Aster's combined occupancy was approximately 64%.

The five-percentage-point difference creates a meaningful efficiency opportunity for Aster.

Aster's occupancy increased sharply

Combined occupancy improved roughly 510 basis points year on year.

Total patient throughput exceeded two million during the quarter.

Volume grew approximately 13%.

This means Aster is already filling part of the spare capacity.

Quality Care drove particularly strong occupancy improvement

The Quality Care platform reported approximately 65.4% occupancy.

That was around 656 basis points higher year on year.

Quality Care generated:

• ₹1,287 crore revenue;
• 19% revenue growth;
• ₹299 crore operating EBITDA;
• 23.2% operating EBITDA margin.

The legacy Quality Care business was therefore already operating above the combined group margin.

Legacy Aster was also improving rapidly

Legacy Aster revenue increased approximately 22% to ₹1,311 crore.

Operating EBITDA increased about 29% to approximately ₹277 crore.

Its reported operating margin reached around 21.1%.

Patient volumes increased 16%.

Inpatient ARPP increased approximately 10% to ₹1.30 lakh.

The merger therefore joins two businesses that were improving before integration

This matters.

Many mergers rely on cost cutting to hide weak underlying operations.

Aster and Quality Care both delivered high-teens or better revenue growth before meaningful synergies were realized.

The combined Q1 result therefore does not depend on a large synergy assumption.

Management is still targeting ₹150–200 crore of incremental EBITDA synergy

The areas include:

• medical consumables procurement;
• pharmacy procurement;
• shared technology platforms;
• international patient acquisition;
• clinical programme sharing;
• renewable energy;
• indirect-cost optimisation;
• shared support functions;
• capex efficiencies;
• talent and academic programmes.

Q1 did not materially include those synergies

This creates a useful future earnings lever.

If ₹150–200 crore is eventually realized on top of the existing annual operating base, margin can increase without equivalent revenue growth.

The risk is that integration savings take longer or are offset by expansion costs.

Aster wants combined EBITDA margin to reach 24–25%

Management has indicated a two-to-three-year path toward approximately 24–25% combined EBITDA margin.

Current margin is 22.2%.

Moving from 22.2% to 25% on a revenue base above ₹10,000 crore annually would create substantial incremental EBITDA.

Mature Aster-Quality Care hospitals already demonstrate the target economics

Management said mature hospitals account for approximately 73% of combined revenue.

It also said each mature hospital sits above approximately 25% unit-level EBITDA margin.

That is important because the 24–25% group target is therefore not purely aspirational.

The mature assets already operate around or above that economic level.

The dilution comes from focus, emerging and turnaround hospitals

Aster divides the network into maturity buckets.

The less-mature assets include:

• new hospitals;
• recently ramped hospitals;
• underperforming mature assets needing clinical investment;
• turnaround facilities.

As those hospitals move toward mature utilisation, consolidated margins can rise.

Kasaragod shows how fast the ramp can work

The Kasaragod hospital achieved monthly EBITDA breakeven within approximately nine months of operations.

That is an important hospital-development benchmark.

Reducing the time between commissioning and EBITDA breakeven materially improves project ROCE.

Fortis has almost the same margin-improvement objective

Fortis generated consolidated operating EBITDA before ESOP of ₹568 crore.

Margin was 22.3%.

Management continues targeting the mid-20s over the medium term.

Its hospital business margin itself was approximately 21.5%.

Fortis hospital revenue grew faster than consolidated diagnostics

Hospital revenue reached approximately ₹2,187 crore.

It grew 19%.

Hospital operating EBITDA reached ₹471 crore.

Occupied beds increased around 16.7%.

ARPOB increased approximately 2.6%.

Fortis's growth is therefore largely volume-driven

The company reported approximately 3,418 occupied beds.

That was up from 2,928 a year earlier.

Occupancy remained near 69% despite capacity additions.

Revenue growth came largely from putting more beds to work.

Aster has more unused operating leverage in occupancy

Aster's combined occupancy of approximately 64% is lower than Fortis.

If Aster can move toward Fortis's 69% without adding a single new bed, it can create significant incremental revenue from existing assets.

This is one of the most important consequences of the merger.

Aster's bed-capacity advantage must be interpreted carefully

It would therefore be wrong to say Aster has exactly 77% more directly comparable operating beds.

The useful conclusion is simpler:

Aster now controls or operates across a materially larger physical hospital platform.

Fortis owns a major asset that Aster does not match at the same disclosed scale: Agilus

Agilus Diagnostics generated:

• ₹407 crore gross Q1 revenue;
• 10.2% revenue growth;
• ₹97 crore operating EBITDA;
• 23.9% operating EBITDA margin;
• approximately 10.46 million tests.

That gives Fortis a profitable non-hospital earnings engine.

Agilus improves Fortis's business diversification

Diagnostics has a different capital model from hospitals.

A diagnostic network can grow through collection centres and centralized laboratories without requiring hundreds of crores of real-estate investment for every location.

This can create attractive returns when test volumes and specialty mix improve.

Aster has labs and pharmacies, but hospitals remain the central thesis

The enlarged Aster ecosystem includes healthcare adjacencies.

But the investment case is dominated by:

• hospital consolidation;
• bed utilisation;
• clinical-complexity expansion;
• merger synergies;
• new-hospital development.

Fortis therefore has the more visible separately reported diagnostics earnings stream today.

Balance-sheet comparison favours Aster on management-reported net debt

Aster's combined debt is modest relative to EBITDA

Annualizing ₹576 crore quarterly operating EBITDA produces roughly ₹2,304 crore.

Combined net debt of ₹1,162 crore is therefore only around half of that annualized operating figure.

This is not a formal trailing leverage ratio.

It simply shows the merged platform begins with significant financial flexibility.

Fortis leverage is also manageable

Fortis reported net debt to EBITDA of approximately 1.01x.

Its debt has increased partly because of acquisitions and strategic investment.

That is not problematic if newly acquired hospitals raise earnings and ROCE.

Aster's expansion pipeline is much larger

About 53% of the planned additions are brownfield.

Approximately 47% are greenfield.

This balance matters.

Brownfield projects generally carry lower ramp risk

An existing hospital already has:

• doctors;
• brand recognition;
• patient referrals;
• payer empanelment;
• support infrastructure.

Adding beds to such a facility can create faster returns than entering a completely new micro-market.

Aster plans roughly 634 FY27 beds

The broader roadmap includes approximately:

• 634 beds in FY27;
• 1,190 in FY28;
• 1,555 in FY29;
• around 800 in FY30 and beyond.

Projects span Trivandrum, Hyderabad, Bengaluru and expansion across existing hospitals.

Fortis is adding more than 400 beds through the rest of FY27

Fortis has near-term expansion across hospitals including:

• Gurugram;
• Noida;
• Manesar;
• Amritsar;
• Kolkata;
• other brownfield projects.

It is also expanding through acquisitions and O&M agreements.

Fortis's O&M model can reduce capital intensity

Under operating-and-management arrangements, Fortis can expand the network without necessarily funding the entire hospital real estate.

This can improve:

• capital efficiency;
• speed of expansion;
• brand reach.

The trade-off is lower economic ownership than a fully owned hospital.

Aster's merger gives it immediate scale without building every bed organically

This is the strategic value of the transaction.

Instead of waiting years to construct a national network, Aster combined:

• Aster's South India footprint;
• CARE's Andhra Pradesh and Telangana presence;
• KIMSHEALTH's Kerala franchise;
• Evercare's additional markets.

The challenge is now integration rather than physical network creation.

The combined geography is much more diversified

The new company has significant exposure across:

• Kerala;
• Karnataka;
• Telangana;
• Andhra Pradesh;
• Maharashtra;
• other Indian states;
• Bangladesh through Evercare.

This reduces dependence on any single metro market.

Fortis has stronger North India concentration

Fortis owns powerful clusters across:

• Delhi NCR;
• Punjab;
• Haryana;
• Bengaluru;
• other regional markets.

Its premium hospitals in Gurugram and other major centres generate high-acuity volumes and international demand.

Fortis international patient revenue reached ₹174 crore

It increased approximately 13%.

International patients contributed around 7.5% of hospital revenue.

Aster management has identified medical-value travel as one of its largest merger-synergy opportunities.

Aster's medical-value travel grew more than 60%

Combined medical-value-travel revenue grew rapidly from a smaller base.

Its contribution remained only around 4% of revenue.

Management wants that contribution to become meaningfully larger over time.

If the enlarged network can cross-refer international patients to centres of excellence, margins can benefit.

This is one of the merger's most interesting revenue synergies

Cost savings are easier to model.

Revenue synergies are harder.

Aster's four brands now have clinical programmes that can potentially be shared across the enlarged network.

Examples include:

• transplants;
• robotic surgery;
• cardiac sciences;
• oncology;
• neurosciences.

Clinical-program transfer can raise ARPP without simple tariff inflation

A hospital earns more when it treats more complex cases.

That can improve average revenue per patient while also creating stronger clinical differentiation.

This is economically better than relying entirely on routine price increases.

Aster's current headline Bull Run ratios require a merger warning

Aster management's pro-forma ROCE was 22.9%

This is very different from Bull Run's roughly 11.3% standardized figure.

The reason is scope and methodology.

Aster management calculates combined pro-forma ROCE using its specified adjustments and post-combination asset base.

Bull Run's field uses standardized historical reported financials.

Neither should be silently substituted for the other.

Headline P/E is particularly unhelpful for Aster right now

Today's share count reflects the merger.

Trailing statutory earnings largely do not contain a full year of Quality Care.

Q1 also contains approximately ₹114 crore of one-off merger costs.

A 225x trailing P/E therefore exaggerates the current operating valuation of the enlarged hospital platform.

A rough operating valuation tells a very different story

This is not a conventional trailing EV/EBITDA multiple.

It simply annualizes one quarter to create a common current operating lens.

The exercise shows why the two stocks are much closer than Aster's headline P/E implies.

The EBITDA definitions also differ

The market is effectively valuing both platforms at almost the same enterprise scale

This makes the operating questions more important than headline valuation:

• Can Aster lift occupancy?
• Can Aster realize ₹150–200 crore synergies?
• Can Fortis push hospital margins toward 25%?
• Can Agilus accelerate beyond 10% growth?
• Can both companies add beds without diluting ROCE?

What must Aster DM Quality Care prove?

• The merger must remain operationally smooth.
• Combined occupancy should continue moving above 64%.
• ₹150–200 crore synergy opportunities need real conversion.
• Group EBITDA margin should progress toward 24–25%.
• 4,179 planned beds need disciplined capital deployment.
• Brownfield assets should ramp faster than greenfields.
• Medical-value travel needs to become a larger revenue contributor.
• Statutory earnings must normalize after merger-related exceptional costs.

What must Fortis Healthcare prove?

• 69% occupancy needs to remain stable through expansion.
• Hospital margin should rise from 21.5% toward the mid-20s.
• Acquired hospitals must reach mature profitability.
• Agilus should increase growth toward management's targeted range.
• Net debt must remain controlled.
• O&M expansion should improve capital efficiency.
• ROCE must rise as new assets mature.

What could make Aster outperform Fortis?

Aster has three powerful operating levers.

First, occupancy can rise from 64%.

Second, underperforming and emerging hospitals can move toward 25%-plus mature margins.

Third, merger synergies have not yet materially entered the Q1 result.

If all three work together, EBITDA can grow faster than revenue.

What could make Fortis outperform Aster?

Fortis has less integration risk.

Its current statutory reporting is cleaner.

It already operates at higher occupancy and owns Agilus, which produces near-24% EBITDA margins with relatively low capital intensity.

If Fortis hospital margins improve while diagnostics compounds, consolidated returns can rise without executing a merger of Aster's complexity.

Which company is larger?

Aster DM Quality Care on stated physical capacity.

The merged platform reports approximately 10,898 capacity beds.

Fortis reports more than 6,150 operational beds including O&M capacity.

The bed definitions are different.

Which is growing faster?

Aster, modestly, on the Q1 pro-forma comparison.

Revenue grew approximately 20% versus Fortis at 17.5%.

Which has higher occupancy?

Fortis Healthcare.

Approximately 69% versus Aster's combined 64%.

Which has higher operating margins?

Essentially neither.

Aster reported 22.2% combined operating EBITDA margin versus Fortis at 22.3% pre-ESOP.

Which has the stronger balance sheet?

Aster on current management-reported combined net debt.

Approximately ₹1,162 crore versus Fortis at ₹2,233 crore.

Which has the stronger diagnostics exposure?

Fortis Healthcare.

Agilus is already a large separately disclosed business with ₹407 crore Q1 gross revenue and 23.9% operating EBITDA margin.

Which stock is cheaper?

Headline P/E gives a misleading answer.

Aster's current 225x-plus trailing P/E is distorted by merger accounting and one-off costs.

On a rough current enterprise-value-to-annualized-Q1-operating-EBITDA calculation, Aster is around 31.7x versus Fortis around 33.4x.

The operating valuation gap is therefore small.

Which is better: Aster DM Quality Care or Fortis Healthcare?

This is currently one of the closest large-hospital comparisons in India.

Aster and Fortis have almost the same market capitalisation.

They generated almost the same Q1 revenue.

They generated almost the same operating EBITDA.

And their current operating EBITDA margins differ by only around 10 basis points.

Aster DM Quality Care has the stronger scale-and-operating-leverage setup. It has substantially more stated capacity, lower combined net debt, a 4,179-bed expansion programme and ₹150–200 crore of targeted merger synergies that were not yet in the Q1 result.

Fortis has the stronger current utilisation-and-diversification setup. Occupancy is higher, statutory earnings are easier to interpret and Agilus gives Fortis a large profitable diagnostics platform.

At September 2026 valuations, the two companies look far more similarly valued than headline P/E suggests. Aster becomes the stronger setup if merger integration lifts occupancy and margins toward 25%; Fortis becomes stronger if its hospitals close the margin gap while Agilus continues compounding without the complexity of a major integration.

Frequently asked questions