CNX Resources vs EQT
CNX and EQT side by side, both in crude petroleum and natural gas. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CNX and EQT compare
EQT is the larger company, worth 6.2 times as much as CNX Resources ($34.1B against $5.5B).
On earnings, CNX Resources is cheaper: it trades at 6.1× trailing earnings, against 12.7× for EQT.
CNX Resources grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (47.0% versus 32.3% for EQT).
CNX Resources keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 35.2% compared with 28.4% at EQT.
EQT pays a dividend yielding 1.2%; CNX Resources does not pay one.
EQT scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 14 for CNX Resources), 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 | CNX | EQT |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $5.5B | $34.1B |
| Share price | $37.49 | $54.54 |
| Change, 1 year | 18.0% | 4.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 151% | 165% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.56 | 0.72 |
| Employees | 390 | 1,523 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 14 | 18 (better) |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Growth score | 3 | 3 |
| Performance score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 6.1× (better) | 12.7× |
| P/S | 2.1× (better) | 3.6× |
| P/B | 1.1× (better) | 1.4× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 6.4× |
| P/FCF | 11.5× | 9.1× (better) |
| FCF yield | 8.7% | 11.0% (better) |
| Fair value | $55.20 | $60.67 |
| Margin of safety | 32.1% (better) | 10.1% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 47.0% (better) | 32.3% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 12.2% | 23.1% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 212% (better) | 137% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 332% (better) | 134% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | – | 83.7% |
| Operating margin | – | 42.5% |
| Net margin | 35.2% (better) | 28.4% |
| FCF margin | 18.6% | 39.4% (better) |
| Return on equity | 20.4% (better) | 11.6% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 10.5% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.47 | 0.22 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 0.82 |
| Interest coverage | – | 10.4× |
| Current ratio | 1.08 (better) | 0.67 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.42 | 2.37 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 8 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.00% | 1.2% (better) |
| Payout ratio | – | 15.0% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 84.3% |
| Buyback yield | 9.6% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 9.6% (better) | 1.2% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 90.9% | 94.3% |
| Held by insiders | 13.7% | 0.69% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$3.9M (better) | −$24.2M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 13.2% | 3.6% |
Go deeper
- CNX stock overview
- CNX income statement
- CNX valuation and score
- EQT stock overview
- EQT income statement
- EQT valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.