An In-Depth Analysis of Canada's Telecom Titans: Rogers vs. Bell – A Definitive Investment Thesis

Executive Summary

Toronto – June 27, 2025 This report provides an exhaustive analysis of Canada's two preeminent telecommunications and media conglomerates, Rogers Communications Inc. (Rogers) and BCE Inc. (Bell), to determine which entity presents a more compelling long-term investment opportunity. The Canadian telecom landscape is undergoing a period of profound transformation, shaped by regulatory intervention, market consolidation, and divergent strategic responses from its largest players. In this environment of flux, a clear victor emerges for the discerning investor.

Bell v Rogers

The definitive investment thesis of this report is that Rogers Communications (TSX: RCI.B, NYSE: RCI) represents the superior long-term stock investment over BCE Inc. (TSX: BCE, NYSE: BCE). This conclusion is predicated on Rogers' clearer strategic path, superior financial management, and a more favorable risk-reward profile for shareholders.

The core arguments supporting this thesis are rooted in the starkly different strategic paths the two giants have chosen. Rogers is currently focused inward, executing a well-defined domestic strategy centered on the successful integration of Shaw Communications and a disciplined deleveraging of its balance sheet. This strategy is highlighted by a sophisticated financial maneuver—the C$7 billion equity investment from Blackstone—that unlocks significant value and reduces debt without diluting shareholders or sacrificing its dividend. Rogers' path to value creation is largely within its own control, hinging on operational execution in a market it knows intimately.  

Conversely, Bell is on a defensive footing, reacting to a challenging domestic regulatory environment. A pivotal decision by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) to mandate wholesale access to its fibre network has fundamentally altered the economics of its core growth strategy. This has catalyzed a high-stakes pivot towards the U.S. market through the C$5.0 billion acquisition of Ziply Fiber and a painful, 50%-plus dividend cut to shore up its balance sheet. Bell is trading the regulatory risk of Canada for the significant competitive and execution risk of the U.S. market, a gamble that introduces a high degree of uncertainty into its future.  

The key differentiators are clear. Rogers has demonstrated strategic clarity and financial acumen, preserving shareholder returns while addressing its primary challenge of post-merger debt. Bell, on the other hand, has been forced into a reactive strategy that has broken its long-standing contract with income investors and thrust it into a new, highly competitive foreign market. While both companies face challenges, Rogers' future is brighter because its path is clearer and its success is contingent on its own execution, not on the outcome of a risky international venture or the unpredictable whims of a national regulator. For the long-term investor, Rogers offers a more secure and transparent path to capital appreciation and sustained income.

The Canadian Telecom & Media Arena: An Oligopoly in Flux

To properly evaluate the investment merits of Rogers and Bell, one must first understand the unique and challenging environment in which they operate. The Canadian telecommunications market is a mature, slow-growth oligopoly that is currently being reshaped by two powerful forces: the emergence of a newly emboldened national competitor and a series of disruptive regulatory interventions. These dynamics form the critical backdrop against which both companies' strategies, financial performance, and future prospects must be judged.

Market Structure: An Entrenched Oligopoly Under Pressure

The Canadian telecom landscape has long been dominated by the "Big Three": Rogers, Bell, and TELUS. This oligopolistic structure has historically afforded these incumbents significant pricing power and sustained profitability.However, the stability of this structure is now facing its most significant test in years. The market itself offers limited organic growth, with forecasts predicting a modest compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of just 2.14% from 2024 to 2029. In this saturated environment, growth is largely a zero-sum game, where one company's gain in market share is another's loss, thereby intensifying competitive pressures.  

The most significant structural shift has been the government-mandated creation of a credible fourth national wireless competitor. The C$26 billion merger of Rogers and Shaw Communications, a move designed to create a more formidable national cable and wireless operator, came with a crucial condition for regulatory approval: Rogers was required to divest Shaw's wireless division, Freedom Mobile. This asset was acquired by Quebecor Inc., a historically regional powerhouse based in Quebec.  

This transaction has fundamentally altered the competitive landscape. Quebecor, known for its aggressive and disruptive tactics in its home province, is now armed with a national wireless footprint. It is leveraging its Freedom and Fizz brands to apply significant pricing pressure across the country, expanding services in British Columbia, Alberta, and Manitoba.The very deal that solidified Rogers' wireline presence in Western Canada has, with considerable irony, unleashed its most aggressive competitor onto the national stage. This development poses a long-term risk of margin compression for all incumbents, a direct and perhaps unforeseen consequence of the merger's approval conditions.  

The CRTC's Heavy Hand: A Defining Regulatory Environment

Compounding the heightened competitive pressure is an activist regulatory body. The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) has become a defining force shaping the industry's economics. In a series of decisions beginning in 2023 and finalized in 2024, the CRTC has mandated that large telephone companies, most notably Bell, must provide smaller competitors with wholesale access to their high-speed fibre-to-the-premises (FTTP) networks.  

The regulator's stated objective is to foster a more competitive retail internet market, leading to greater affordability and choice for Canadian consumers. While more than a dozen smaller providers have begun using this new wholesale access since it came into effect in February 2025, the policy has been met with vehement opposition from the infrastructure owners who invested billions of dollars to build these networks.  

The impact of this policy cannot be overstated, as it has created a capital allocation crisis for the incumbents. By allowing competitors to leverage these advanced networks without bearing the same massive capital outlay, the CRTC has significantly diluted the return on investment for building new domestic fibre infrastructure. This erosion of the economic moat associated with network ownership has had a direct and material impact on corporate strategy.

Bell, the primary builder of FTTP networks in Eastern and Central Canada, has been the most vocal critic and has taken the most drastic action. The company has explicitly and repeatedly stated that the CRTC's wholesale access mandate is the direct cause of its decision to slash its capital expenditure plans by over C$1 billion for 2024-2025. This reduction in investment means that Bell's fibre build-out will now bypass 700,000 homes and businesses that were previously on its roadmap. The regulator's domestic policy, aimed at lowering consumer prices, has thus become a direct catalyst for a fundamental strategic pivot. Faced with a diminished incentive to invest at home, Bell's management, under pressure to deliver growth to shareholders, has been compelled to seek higher-return opportunities elsewhere. This chain of events leads directly to its decision to expand into the United States, a market where such wholesale mandates are not a primary risk. The CRTC's heavy hand is, therefore, not just a footnote in the Canadian telecom story; it is a primary driver of Bell's risky international venture.  

Rogers Communications (RCI) Analysis: Post-Merger Digestion and Deleveraging

Rogers Communications is at a pivotal juncture in its corporate history. Its current strategic posture is overwhelmingly defined by the monumental task of integrating Shaw Communications and the subsequent, non-negotiable imperative to fortify its balance sheet. The company's strategy is clear, domestically focused, and hinges on execution.

Corporate and Asset Profile: A Converged Behemoth

Rogers operates as a fully converged communications and media giant across three core segments: Wireless, Cable, and Media.  

• Wireless: This segment is the cornerstone of Rogers' profitability. As Canada's largest wireless provider, it serves approximately 11.9 million subscribers through its distinct brand hierarchy: the premium Rogers brand, the mid-tier Fido, and the value-oriented Chatr. This multi-brand strategy allows it to capture customers across the entire market spectrum.  

  
  

• Cable: Following the transformative acquisition of Shaw, Rogers' cable division is now a true coast-to-coast operator. It is a leading provider of high-speed internet, television (Ignite TV), and home phone services to residential and business customers. The integration of Shaw's western footprint has given Rogers the national scale to compete head-to-head with Bell in the wireline market.  

  
  

• Media: Rogers' media division possesses a unique and powerful collection of assets with an unmistakable focus on sports. This portfolio includes the Sportsnet family of channels, which holds the exclusive 12-year national broadcast rights for the National Hockey League (NHL)—a cultural and viewership cornerstone in Canada. The company also owns the Toronto Blue Jays MLB team and their home stadium, the Rogers Centre. Furthermore, it holds a 37.5% stake in Maple Leaf Sports & Entertainment (MLSE), the parent company of the Toronto Maple Leafs (NHL), Toronto Raptors (NBA), Toronto FC (MLS), and Toronto Argonauts (CFL). Beyond sports, the media segment owns the Citytv and multicultural OMNI television networks, along with a portfolio of specialty channels, radio stations, and podcasts.  

  
  

Strategic Direction: Integration and Financial Fortification

Rogers' current strategic direction can be summarized in two words: integration and deleveraging.

The C$26 billion acquisition of Shaw Communications, which closed in April 2023, was a company-defining transaction. The primary strategic goal was to create a robust national wireline and wireless competitor to Bell, enabling accelerated investment in 5G networks and unlocking significant cost and capital synergies. The company is now deep in the complex process of integrating Shaw's assets, networks, and corporate culture.  

This mega-merger, however, came at a significant cost to the balance sheet. The assumption of Shaw's debt pushed Rogers' debt leverage ratio to a high of 4.5x adjusted EBITDA at the end of 2024. Consequently, management has made deleveraging its most urgent financial priority to regain flexibility, protect its investment-grade credit rating, and reassure investors.  

In a move that demonstrates considerable financial sophistication, Rogers engineered a landmark transaction to address its debt burden. In mid-2025, the company announced a C$7 billion equity investment from a consortium led by Blackstone and including major Canadian pension funds. The structure of this deal is a masterstroke of financial engineering. Rogers carved out a portion of its non-core, non-customer-facing wireless backhaul transport infrastructure into a new subsidiary. It then sold a non-controlling interest in this subsidiary to the Blackstone-led group, who, as long-term infrastructure investors, are attracted to the stable, predictable cash flows these assets generate.  

This transaction achieves multiple objectives simultaneously. It provides Rogers with a massive infusion of cash dedicated to debt repayment, which is projected to reduce its leverage ratio by nearly a full turn to a much more manageable 3.6x on a pro-forma basis as of Q1 2025. Crucially, Rogers retains full operational control of its network and will continue to consolidate the subsidiary's financials. This creative solution allowed the company to solve its primary strategic problem—high debt—without resorting to dilutive equity issuance or a painful dividend cut, a stark contrast to the path taken by Bell. It is a clear demonstration of proactive and shareholder-friendly financial management.  

Network and Operational Performance: The Reliability Play

Rogers is backing its market ambitions with substantial network investment and a focus on quality of service.

• 5G Leadership: The company is aggressively rolling out its 5G network, which now covers over 2,500 communities across Canada. In a significant technological step, Rogers became the first Canadian carrier to begin deploying Ericsson's 5G Advanced (5G-A) technology. This includes RedCap software, which enhances network efficiency for the growing Internet of Things (IoT) ecosystem, and network slicing, which can provide dedicated, prioritized network resources for critical applications like emergency services. Major expansion projects are underway to bridge the digital divide, such as the C$300-million public-private partnership to build or upgrade hundreds of cell towers in rural Eastern Ontario.  

  
  

• Fibre Expansion: Rogers is also making a concerted push to expand its fibre-to-the-home (FTTH) network. Through programs like Ontario's Accelerated High-Speed Internet Program (AHSIP), the company is investing hundreds of millions to connect tens of thousands of homes and businesses in underserved communities across the province, from Prince Edward County to Haldimand County.  

  
  

• Network Accolades: This investment is translating into recognized network superiority. Independent testing firm Opensignal has consistently awarded Rogers for having Canada's most reliable 5G network. The same firm also recognized Rogers for providing the best overall Video Experience and Live Video Experience, crucial metrics in an era of media streaming. This public focus on network reliability and quality is a central pillar of its customer acquisition and retention strategy.  

  
  

Media Strategy: Content is King, and Sports is the Kingdom

Rogers' media strategy is distinct from Bell's and is anchored by its deep entrenchment in the world of premium sports.

• Sports-Centric Moat: The ownership of irreplaceable live sports rights (the 12-year NHL deal) and iconic sports franchises (Blue Jays, MLSE) provides Rogers with a powerful and difficult-to-replicate competitive moat for its Sportsnet media properties. This premium content drives subscriber loyalty to its television and streaming platforms and provides a hedge against the general decline of linear television.  

  
  

• Expanding Original Content: While sports are the main event, Rogers is also bolstering its lifestyle and entertainment offerings. For the 2025/26 season, Rogers Sports & Media announced its most ambitious slate of Canadian original programming yet, with over 115 hours of new content set to debut on its specialty channels like HGTV and Food Network. This investment aims to capture a broader audience and reduce reliance on foreign-produced content.  

  
  

• Strategic Digital Partnerships: Recognizing the shift to streaming, Rogers has strategically positioned itself as a key partner for global media giants. It holds the exclusive Canadian representation for advertising on Disney+ and Tubi, giving it a strong foothold in the rapidly growing ad-supported video-on-demand (AVOD) market. This allows Rogers to monetize streaming viewership even on platforms it does not own.  

  
  

While this sports-centric strategy is a formidable strength today, it also carries a long-term concentration risk. The value of these media assets is intrinsically linked to the cost of acquiring and retaining premier sports rights, which are subject to continuous and intense bidding wars from both traditional and new digital competitors. If consumer appetite for traditional sports viewing wanes over the next decade, or if Rogers were to lose a key rights package in a future negotiation, a foundational pillar of its media strategy and value proposition would be significantly challenged.

BCE Inc. (BCE) Analysis: US Expansion Amidst Domestic Headwinds

BCE Inc., known ubiquitously as Bell, is navigating one of the most challenging periods in its long history as Canada's incumbent telecommunications leader. Its current strategy is defined by a defensive reaction to domestic regulatory pressures, which has forced a bold, but inherently risky, pivot towards the U.S. market in a search for growth. This strategic realignment has had profound consequences for its financial policy and its relationship with investors.

Corporate and Asset Profile: The Incumbent Powerhouse

Bell's formidable market position is built on a foundation of incumbency and a vast, diversified asset base spanning its three primary operating segments: Bell Wireless, Bell Wireline, and Bell Media.  

• Wireless: A leading national wireless provider, Bell operates a multi-brand portfolio to compete across all market segments, including the premium Bell Mobility brand, the youth-focused Virgin Plus, and the prepaid, low-cost Lucky Mobile.  

  
  

• Wireline: This segment is the historical core of the company. As the incumbent local exchange carrier (ILEC) for the majority of the Canadian population—covering Ontario, Québec, Atlantic Canada, and Manitoba—Bell enjoys a dominant market position in residential and business landline, internet, and television services in these vast territories. Its key asset is its extensive fibre-to-the-home (FTTH) network, which provides a technologically superior product to legacy cable.  

  
  

• Media: Bell Media is a premier Canadian content creator and distributor. Its portfolio includes the country's most-watched private conventional television network, CTV, and the French-language network Noovo. In the lucrative sports media landscape, it owns TSN and its French-language counterpart RDS, the primary competitors to Rogers' Sportsnet. Its flagship digital asset is the Crave streaming service, which serves as a powerful content aggregator through exclusive Canadian licensing deals for premium global content from HBO, Max, and others. Like Rogers, Bell also holds a 37.5% ownership stake in Maple Leaf Sports & Entertainment (MLSE).  

  
  

Strategic Direction: A Defensive Pivot and Enterprise Focus

Bell's strategic direction has been reshaped by external pressures. The company is now pursuing growth through two main avenues: a major foray into the U.S. market and a concerted effort to build out its enterprise technology services division.

The cornerstone of this new strategy is the announced C$5.0 billion acquisition of Ziply Fiber, a leading independent fibre provider in the U.S. Pacific Northwest. This move represents a dramatic pivot for the historically Canada-focused company. The official rationale is to leverage Bell's deep expertise in building and operating fibre networks to capitalize on the large and comparatively underpenetrated U.S. market, thereby accelerating growth and diversifying its geographic footprint. However, this move cannot be viewed in isolation; it is a direct consequence of the deteriorating investment climate in its home market.  

Simultaneously, Bell is attempting to diversify its revenue streams by bolstering its Bell Business Markets division. Through a series of smaller, targeted acquisitions of tech services companies like Stratejm (cybersecurity) and CloudKettle (Salesforce implementation), Bell is aiming to transform itself into a significant player in providing integrated technology solutions to enterprise clients. This strategy seeks to capture a greater share of enterprise IT budgets, moving beyond the sale of basic connectivity.  

Navigating Regulatory and Financial Pressures

Bell's strategic pivot is inextricably linked to the financial and regulatory pressures it faces. The most significant of these was the decision to slash its dividend, a move that sent shockwaves through the Canadian investment community.

In the first quarter of 2025, Bell announced a reduction in its annualized common share dividend from C3.99toC1.75—a cut of over 50%. The company stated this was a proactive measure to "support deleveraging efforts while providing enhanced flexibility". However, this action was not taken from a position of strength. It was a reactive necessity, a symptom of a business model under duress. The CRTC's wholesale access ruling fundamentally undermined the profitability of Bell's primary domestic growth engine. This, combined with intense price competition, declining legacy revenues, and the need to finance the Ziply acquisition, made the previous dividend payout mathematically unsustainable. Management was forced to choose between its old strategy and dividend policy and a new one; it chose the new one, and the dividend had to be sacrificed. This decision represents a fundamental break in the company's long-standing implicit contract with its base of income-oriented investors.  

The cash flow freed up by the dividend cut is being re-allocated. It helps to offset the C$1 billion-plus reduction in domestic capital expenditures caused by the CRTC ruling and provides the financial capacity to manage its significant debt load and fund the Ziply acquisition. Bell is actively managing its balance sheet through a series of tender offers to repurchase and refinance its outstanding debt securities.  

Network and Operational Performance: A Tale of Two Strategies

Bell's network performance presents a strategic contradiction. By most objective measures, Bell's networks are best-in-class. Independent testing firms GWS and Ookla have consistently recognized Bell's 5G and 5G+ network as the fastest in Canada. As of the end of 2024, its 5G network reached 87% of the Canadian population. Similarly, its FTTH network, where deployed, is technologically superior to cable, offering symmetrical upload and download speeds that competitors struggle to match.  

The contradiction lies in the fact that despite possessing this superior network technology, Bell is now actively slowing its expansion in Canada. The regulatory environment has disincentivized the company from deploying its best product to new Canadian customers. This has led to the strategic paradox of pulling back on its most significant competitive advantage in its home market to fund an expansion into a foreign one.  

This pivot to the U.S., while a logical response to its domestic challenges, introduces a new and significant layer of risk. Bell is trading the "regulatory risk" of Canada for the "competitive and execution risk" of the United States. In Canada, Bell's competitive advantage is built on a century of incumbency, brand dominance, and network ownership. In the U.S. Pacific Northwest, it will be a new, smaller player competing against American giants like Comcast, Charter, and Lumen, all of which have deep pockets, established regional operations, and extensive experience in the uniquely competitive and differently regulated U.S. market. There is no guarantee that Bell's Canadian operational playbook will translate to success south of the border, making the Ziply acquisition a high-stakes bet on the company's future.  

Media Strategy: Crave as the Digital Hub

Bell Media's strategy is centered on establishing its Crave streaming service as the indispensable digital entertainment hub for Canadians.

This strategy is built on a foundation of content aggregation and exclusivity. Bell has leveraged its scale to secure crucial, long-term exclusive Canadian licensing rights for some of the world's most sought-after content, including all programming from HBO and Max Originals from Warner Bros. Discovery. In a major strategic coup, Bell also partnered with Disney Entertainment to offer bundled packages that combine Crave, TSN, and Disney+ at a discount, creating a comprehensive content offering that is difficult for competitors to match.  

To complement this world-class acquired content, Bell is making substantial investments in its own original programming. For the 2025/26 season, Bell Media announced an ambitious slate of 116 original English and French-language titles, spanning scripted series, documentaries, and unscripted formats, in a bid to create unique Canadian stories and differentiate its platforms. The company is also evolving the Crave platform itself, with plans to integrate content from its linear channels like CTV and Noovo, creating a single, unified digital destination for all of its media assets.  

Head-to-Head Financial & Valuation Showdown

A direct comparison of the financial performance, balance sheet health, valuation, and shareholder return policies of Rogers and Bell reveals a clear divergence in their recent trajectories and future outlooks. This quantitative analysis provides the empirical foundation for the investment thesis.

Table 1: Comparative Asset Profile

Feature	Rogers Communications Inc. (RCI)	BCE Inc. (BCE)
Wireless Brands	Rogers, Fido, Chatr	Bell, Virgin Plus, Lucky Mobile
Wireline/Cable Brands	Rogers Ignite Internet & TV	Bell Fibe Internet & TV, Bell Aliant, Bell MTS
Key TV Networks	Citytv, OMNI Television	CTV, Noovo
Key Sports Media	Sportsnet, NHL Rights (National), Toronto Blue Jays, 37.5% of MLSE	TSN, RDS, 37.5% of MLSE
Key Streaming Assets	Citytv+, Sportsnet+, Exclusive Ad Rep for Disney+ & Tubi	Crave (with exclusive HBO/Max rights)
Other Holdings	Rogers Bank, Rogers Centre	Bell Technical Solutions, The Source (converting to Best Buy Express)

This profile highlights the core structural differences. Rogers' media assets are uniquely concentrated in high-value sports ownership and broadcast rights, while Bell's media power comes from its Crave platform, which acts as a "super-aggregator" of premium global and domestic content. In wireline, Bell's incumbency in Central and Eastern Canada is its key advantage, whereas Rogers' strength is its newly national cable footprint post-Shaw acquisition.

Performance & Profitability: A Tale of Two Trajectories

The financial results from the most recent fiscal year and quarter paint a starkly different picture for each company.

In the full fiscal year 2024, Rogers' performance was defined by the integration of Shaw. Revenue grew a healthy 7% to C20.6billion,and morei mpressively,net income more than doubled to C1.7 billion.

This surge in profitability was driven by the contribution from the newly acquired assets and higher adjusted EBITDA. In contrast, Bell's 2024 was a year of decline. Revenue slipped by 1.1% to C  

24.4billion,andnetincomecollapsedbyastaggering84375 million. This dramatic drop was primarily the result of massive non-cash impairment charges related to the declining value of its legacy radio and television assets within the Bell Media segment.  

The most recent quarterly results from Q1 2025 continue these divergent narratives. Rogers posted steady, if modest, growth, with revenue increasing by 2% to C5.0billionandnetincomerising9280 million, indicating continued successful execution of its integration plan. Bell's Q1 2025 results require careful interpretation. While reported revenue continued to decline, falling 1.3% to C  

5.9billion,netincomeappearedtosurgeby49.5683 million. However, this net income figure was artificially inflated by significant one-time gains from the early redemption of debt. The underlying operational performance remained under pressure, with adjusted EPS falling 4.2%.  

Table 2: Annual Financial Performance (2024)

Metric	Rogers (2024)	Bell (2024)
Revenue	C$20,604 M	C$24,409 M
YoY Change	+7%	-1.1%
Net Income	C$1,734 M	C$375 M
YoY Change	+104%	-83.9%
Diluted EPS	C$3.20	C$0.18
YoY Change	+98%	-92.1%
Total Debt	C$41,896 M	C$40,504 M
Total Equity	C$10,403 M	C$17,360 M
Source: Company Annual Reports

Table 3: Quarterly Financial Performance (Q1 2025)

Metric	Rogers (Q1 2025)	Bell (Q1 2025)
Revenue	C$4,976 M	C$5,930 M
YoY Change	+2%	-1.3%
Net Income	C$280 M	C$683 M
YoY Change	+9%	+49.5%
Diluted EPS	C$0.50	C$0.68
YoY Change	+9%	+54.5%
Total Debt	C$46,554 M	C$37,656 M (Net Debt)
Total Equity	C$10,628 M	C$17,620 M
Source: Company Quarterly Reports

Balance Sheet & Financial Health: Debt and Deleveraging

Both companies carry substantial debt loads, a characteristic of the capital-intensive telecom industry. At the end of fiscal 2024, Rogers and Bell had C41.9billionandC40.5 billion in total debt, respectively. The critical differentiating factor is their strategy and timeline for deleveraging.  

Rogers' debt-to-EBITDA ratio peaked at 4.5x following the Shaw deal, a level that concerned investors. However, the company has laid out a clear and rapid path to a more comfortable leverage level. The C$7 billion Blackstone transaction is the key, projected to bring the pro-forma leverage ratio down to approximately 3.6x, achieving a significant portion of its deleveraging goal in a single, elegant move.  

Bell is also focused on deleveraging but is projecting a longer timeline. The company has stated a target of reaching a net debt leverage ratio of approximately 3.5x adjusted EBITDA by the end of 2027. This three-year timeline, compared to Rogers' more immediate improvement, reflects the ongoing pressures on its earnings and cash flow.  

Valuation Analysis: Cheap for a Reason?

On the surface, both stocks appear inexpensive, trading at significant discounts to the broader market and their own historical valuation multiples. This reflects investor sentiment that has soured on the Canadian telecom sector due to competitive and regulatory concerns.

Rogers' stock (RCI) trades at a price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of approximately 12.3x, a price-to-sales (P/S) ratio of 1.0x, and a price-to-book (P/B) ratio of 2.0x. These multiples are all below their 3- and 5-year historical averages, suggesting the stock is undervalued relative to its recent past.  

Bell's stock (BCE) valuation is more complex. Its reported GAAP P/E ratio is distorted to an unhelpful level of over 70x due to the collapse in 2024 net income. Using adjusted earnings, the P/E ratio is in the range of 9.3x to 10.1x, which appears cheaper than Rogers. Its P/S ratio is slightly higher at ~1.2x, and its P/B ratio is comparable at ~2.0x. While Bell may appear to be the "cheaper" stock on an adjusted P/E basis, this discount reflects the significantly higher uncertainty and risk associated with its strategic pivot, regulatory headwinds, and broken dividend track record. It is a potential "value trap," where a low valuation is a justification for fundamental problems rather than an opportunity.  

Table 4: Valuation Multiples & Ratios

Metric	Rogers (RCI)	Bell (BCE)
P/E Ratio (TTM, Adjusted)	~12.3x	~9.3x
Price/Sales Ratio (TTM)	~1.0x	~1.2x
Price/Book Ratio (TTM)	~2.0x	~2.0x
EV/EBITDA (TTM)	~2.3x	~N/A
Debt/Equity Ratio	464.4x	~233%
Source: Market Data Providers

Shareholder Return & Dividend Policy: A Clear Divergence

For many investors, the appeal of telecom stocks lies in their stable and growing dividends. On this front, the two companies have taken dramatically different paths, providing the clearest signal of their respective financial health and strategic priorities.

Rogers has steadfastly maintained its quarterly dividend of C$0.50 per share throughout the costly Shaw acquisition and the subsequent deleveraging period. This commitment was made possible by the creative Blackstone transaction, which provided the necessary capital without forcing a choice between the balance sheet and the dividend. The stock currently offers an attractive forward dividend yield of approximately 5.0%.  

Bell, in stark contrast, shattered its reputation as a dependable dividend growth stock. As discussed, the company cut its annualized dividend by more than half in Q1 2025. While the new, lower dividend still provides a high forward yield of around 5.8%, the act of cutting the dividend so severely signals significant underlying business pressure and has fundamentally altered the investment case for income-focused investors.  

Table 5: Dividend Profile

Feature	Rogers Communications Inc. (RCI)	BCE Inc. (BCE)
Ticker	RCI.B (TSX), RCI (NYSE)	BCE (TSX), BCE (NYSE)
Current Annual Dividend	C$2.00	C$1.75
Forward Dividend Yield	~5.0%	~5.8%
Payout Ratio (vs Adj. EPS)	~62.5% (2024)	High (Recent cut reflects unsustainability of prior payout)
Recent Dividend Action	Stable; maintained through major acquisition	Cut by >50% in Q1 2025
Source: Company Filings and Market Data

Final Verdict & Investment Recommendation

The preceding analysis has dissected the operational strategies, financial performance, and market positioning of Canada's two telecommunications titans. Synthesizing these findings leads to a decisive conclusion regarding which company offers a brighter future and represents the superior investment for the long term.

The Investment Thesis Synthesized: Domestic Execution vs. International Gamble

The investment case for each company can be distilled into a core narrative.

An investment in Rogers is a bet on domestic execution. The company has a clear, albeit challenging, path forward: successfully integrate the massive Shaw acquisition, realize the promised cost and capital synergies, and use the proceeds from its clever Blackstone deal to systematically pay down debt. The key variables that will determine its success—integration efficiency, marketing effectiveness, and network management—are largely within the control of its management team, operating in a Canadian market they know intimately.

An investment in Bell is a bet on a strategic pivot. The company is attempting to navigate significant domestic headwinds by embarking on a high-risk, high-reward venture into the competitive U.S. fibre market. Its success is contingent not only on its own ability to execute in a foreign market but also on external factors beyond its control, namely the future actions of the CRTC in Canada and the aggressive responses of larger, entrenched competitors in the United States.

Assessing the "Brighter Future": Clarity vs. Uncertainty

When assessing which company has the "brighter future," the more operative word is "clearer." Rogers' future, while not without challenges, is far clearer. Its strategic objectives are well-defined and its path to achieving them is transparent. The market can readily track its progress against key metrics like synergy realization, subscriber growth, and debt reduction.

Bell's future is shrouded in a much thicker fog of uncertainty. The range of potential outcomes is dramatically wider. A successful U.S. expansion could, in theory, unlock significant new growth. However, a failure to compete effectively could result in a costly and value-destructive distraction. At home, the persistent threat of further adverse regulatory rulings creates an unpredictable environment for capital planning. This lack of clarity makes it exceedingly difficult for investors to confidently model the company's long-term earnings and cash flow potential.

The Better Stock Investment: Risk-Adjusted Returns

Based on a comprehensive assessment of the available evidence, Rogers Communications (RCI) is the superior long-term stock investment.

The rationale is grounded in its more favorable risk-reward profile. Rogers offers investors a clear, self-directed catalyst for value creation. The market has already priced in the risks associated with the Shaw acquisition and the competitive landscape. The potential upside lies in the company successfully executing its integration and deleveraging plan. As it hits its targets and the balance sheet strengthens, the stock is likely to re-rate to a higher valuation multiple, driving capital appreciation. In the meantime, investors are paid a secure and attractive dividend, which management has skillfully protected. Rogers' creative financial strategy and commitment to shareholder returns stand in stark contrast to Bell's.

Bell (BCE) is a deep-value, contrarian play that is suitable only for investors with a very high tolerance for risk and a long time horizon. Its low valuation reflects profound and legitimate concerns about its future. The dividend cut has alienated its core income-investor base, and it will take years of flawless execution to regain that trust. The U.S. expansion is a high-stakes gamble that could go either way. For the prudent long-term investor, the risk of BCE being a "value trap"—a stock that is cheap for good reason and stays cheap—is simply too high compared to the clearer, more controllable path offered by Rogers.

Summary of Key Risks

No investment is without risk. A summary of the primary risks for each company is as follows:

Rogers Communications (RCI):

1. Integration Risk: The primary risk is a failure to fully realize the projected C$1 billion in annual cost synergies from the Shaw acquisition, which would negatively impact profitability and the deleveraging timeline.

2. Debt Risk: While the Blackstone deal provides a clear path, any unexpected operational stumbles or macroeconomic shocks could slow the pace of deleveraging, constraining financial flexibility.

3. Competitive Risk: The emergence of a nationally empowered Quebecor/Freedom Mobile as an aggressive price leader could lead to sustained pressure on wireless margins and average revenue per user (ARPU).  

   
   

BCE Inc. (BCE):

1. Regulatory Risk: The most significant risk is the potential for further adverse CRTC decisions that could continue to erode the profitability of network investments in Canada, forcing more defensive, value-destroying actions.  

   
   

2. Execution Risk: A failure to successfully integrate Ziply Fiber and compete effectively against larger, more experienced U.S. telecom operators could turn the acquisition into a significant misallocation of capital.  

   
   

3. Dividend Risk: The recent, deep dividend cut raises legitimate questions about the board's long-term commitment to shareholder returns and the sustainability of even the current, lower payout if its strategic pivot falters.  

   
   

4. Reputational Risk: Having broken its long-standing dividend growth narrative, Bell risks a permanent de-rating of its stock by the market, particularly among the income-focused institutional and retail investors who were once its core constituency.

   
   

So are you buying, holding or selling?

Check out my other blog posts here