Atmos Energy vs Western Midstream Partners, LP
ATO and WES side by side, both in gas production and distribution. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How ATO and WES compare
Atmos Energy is the larger company, worth 1.5 times as much as Western Midstream Partners, LP ($29.1B against $19.2B).
Western Midstream Partners, LP grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (18.0% versus 6.5% for Atmos Energy).
Western Midstream Partners, LP keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 29.6% compared with 28.5% at Atmos Energy.
Both pay dividends: Atmos Energy yields 2.3% and Western Midstream Partners, LP 7.9%.
Atmos Energy scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 8 for Western Midstream Partners, LP), 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 | ATO | WES |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $29.1B | $19.2B |
| Share price | $172.41 | $46.39 |
| Change, 1 year | 0.44% | 21.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 83.4% | 115% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.37 | 0.59 |
| Employees | 5,487 | 1,704 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 (better) | 8 |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend score | 3 | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 20.5× | – |
| P/S | 5.9× | 4.4× (better) |
| P/B | 1.9× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 15.0× | 11.2× (better) |
| PEG | 2.04 | – |
| FCF yield | −6.9% | – |
| Fair value | $161.26 | $57.21 |
| Margin of safety | −6.9% | 18.9% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 6.5% | 18.0% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 10.8% (better) | 6.7% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 21.1% (better) | 0.89% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 15.5% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 8.8% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | – | 92.1% |
| Operating margin | 37.0% | 40.2% (better) |
| Net margin | 28.5% | 29.6% (better) |
| FCF margin | −41.1% | – |
| Return on equity | 9.8% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 6.2% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.67 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.75 | 3.55 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 12.8× (better) | 4.1× |
| Current ratio | 0.81 | 0.91 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.65 (better) | 1.57 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.3% | 7.9% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 45.1% | 116% |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 8.6% | – |
| Buyback yield | −3.7% | – |
| Shareholder yield | −1.4% | 7.9% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 96.5% | 43.1% |
| Held by insiders | 0.40% | 36.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$26.7K | $51.2K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.7% | 2.3% |
Go deeper
- ATO stock overview
- ATO income statement
- ATO valuation and score
- WES stock overview
- WES income statement
- WES valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.