Computed head-to-head · 6 dimensions
MRK vs UNH
Merck & Co., Inc. versus UnitedHealth Group Incorporated — yield, safety, growth trend, cost, scale, and tax treatment.
MRK wins 3–0 on our six-dimension comparison, but UNH can still be the better fit depending on your priorities — see each dimension below.
Scorecard at a glance
| Dimension | MRK | UNH | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Yield | 2.84% | 2.21% | MRK wins |
| Dividend safety | 6.9/10 | 7.0/10 | Tie |
| Growth trend | -0.18% vs 5y | +0.56% vs 5y | MRK wins |
| Volatility (beta) | 0.20 | 0.63 | MRK wins |
| Scale | $295.7B | $382.1B | Tie |
| Tax efficiency | Qualified-eligible | Qualified-eligible | Tie |
| Overall | 3 wins | 0 wins | MRK wins |
Dimension by dimension
MRK wins on yield (2.84% vs 2.21%)
On a $10,000 investment that's about $63 more in annual dividend income before taxes — though higher yield often comes with higher risk.
Safety scores are too close to call (6.9/10 vs 7.0/10)
Both score within 0.3 points on our 0-10 dividend safety scale — comparable risk profiles on the signals we measure.
MRK shows healthier dividend-vs-price trend
MRK's yield is 0.18% below its 5y average, versus 0.56% for UNH. Lower (or below-average) yield trend often means price appreciation outpaced distributions — a healthier signal.
MRK is less volatile (beta 0.20 vs 0.63)
Lower beta means smaller swings vs the S&P 500 — generally a steadier hold for income investors.
Comparable scale ($295.7B vs $382.1B)
Within 1.5x of each other on market cap / AUM — similar institutional footprint.
Both pay qualified-dividend-eligible distributions
Neither is structurally flagged for ordinary-income tax treatment. Most distributions should qualify for the lower long-term capital gains rate if holding-period requirements are met.
How we compare these
Every comparison on this page is computed from current public data, not written by hand. Yield comes from the most recent dividend distribution annualized over current price. Safety scores combine yield zone, payout ratio, trend vs 5-year average, instrument type, and size — see our methodology for the exact formula. Tax-efficiency flags identify covered-call ETFs, REITs, and mREITs which distribute primarily as ordinary income.
This is educational, not investment advice.Scores reflect a snapshot of public data on the "as of" dates shown on each ticker's safety page. Verify on the issuer's investor relations page or your brokerage before making decisions.
Frequently asked
Which is better for income, MRK or UNH?
MRK wins 3–0 on our six-dimension comparison, but UNH can still be the better fit depending on your priorities — see each dimension below.
MRK vs UNH: which has a higher dividend yield?
MRK yields 2.84% and UNH yields 2.21%. On a $10,000 investment that's about $63 more in annual dividend income before taxes — though higher yield often comes with higher risk.
Is MRK or UNH a safer dividend in 2026?
MRK scores 6.9/10 (Solid) on the Infnits dividend safety scale. UNH scores 7.0/10 (Solid). UNH is the safer pick on our scoring model.
Which has better dividend growth, MRK or UNH?
MRK's yield is 0.18% below its 5y average, versus 0.56% for UNH. Lower (or below-average) yield trend often means price appreciation outpaced distributions — a healthier signal.
MRK vs UNH: which is more tax-efficient?
Neither is structurally flagged for ordinary-income tax treatment. Most distributions should qualify for the lower long-term capital gains rate if holding-period requirements are met.
Already own MRK or UNH? See if the other adds anything.
Connect your brokerage and Infnits checks whether adding MRK to your existing portfolio actually diversifies — or just duplicates exposure (ETF look-through included).
Check overlap with my portfolio →