ProFrac vs SLB
ACDC and SLB side by side, both in oil and gas field services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ACDC and SLB compare
SLB is the larger company, worth 90 times as much as ProFrac ($79.8B against $889M).
SLB grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (2.5% versus −16.2% for ProFrac).
SLB keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 8.5% compared with −22.8% at ProFrac.
SLB pays a dividend yielding 2.2%; ProFrac does not pay one.
SLB scores higher on the StockData Score (9 against 3 for ProFrac), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | ACDC | SLB |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $889M | $79.8B |
| Share price | $4.88 | $53.74 |
| Change, 1 year | −9.6% | 45.9% |
| Change, 5 years | – | 60.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.20 | 0.73 |
| Employees | 2,280 | 109K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 3 | 9 (better) |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Performance score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Health score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 26.0× |
| P/S | 0.5× (better) | 2.2× |
| P/B | 1.6× (better) | 3.1× |
| EV/EBITDA | 15.6× | 12.2× (better) |
| P/FCF | – | 16.6× |
| FCF yield | −6.8% | 6.0% (better) |
| Fair value | $6.53 | $39.80 |
| Margin of safety | 25.3% (better) | −35.0% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −16.2% | 2.5% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 28.8% (better) | 8.6% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | −24.2% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | −29.1% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 21.5% | – |
| Operating margin | −15.0% | – |
| Net margin | −22.8% | 8.5% (better) |
| FCF margin | −3.4% | 13.2% (better) |
| Return on equity | −57.4% | 13.4% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | −12.0% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.99 | 0.43 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 8.05 | 0.98 (better) |
| Interest coverage | −2.0× | – |
| Current ratio | 0.84 | 1.44 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 0.17 | 2.95 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 2.2% |
| Payout ratio | – | 54.7% |
| Buyback yield | – | 1.5% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 3.7% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 17.7% | 92.3% |
| Held by insiders | – | 0.19% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $9.8M (better) | −$25.6M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 4.1% |
Go deeper
- ACDC stock overview
- ACDC income statement
- ACDC valuation and score
- SLB stock overview
- SLB income statement
- SLB valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.