Chesapeake Utilities vs RGC Resources
CPK and RGCO 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 CPK and RGCO compare
Chesapeake Utilities is the larger company, worth 14 times as much as RGC Resources ($3.4B against $234M).
On earnings, RGC Resources is cheaper: it trades at 16.7× trailing earnings, against 17.1× for Chesapeake Utilities.
Chesapeake Utilities grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (64.5% versus 13.8% for RGC Resources).
Chesapeake Utilities keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 14.2% compared with 13.1% at RGC Resources.
Both pay dividends: Chesapeake Utilities yields 2.0% and RGC Resources 3.9%.
Chesapeake Utilities scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 12 for RGC 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 | CPK | RGCO |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $3.4B | $234M |
| Share price | $140.10 | $22.43 |
| Change, 1 year | 4.0% | 5.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 6.0% | 1.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.28 | 0.38 |
| Employees | 1,300 | 106 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 (better) | 12 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 17.1× | 16.7× (better) |
| P/S | 2.4× | 2.2× (better) |
| P/B | 2.0× | 1.9× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 10.1× (better) | 12.4× |
| P/FCF | – | 116× |
| PEG | 2.95 | – |
| FCF yield | −9.4% | 0.86% (better) |
| Fair value | $168.22 | $22.00 |
| Margin of safety | 16.7% (better) | −1.9% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 64.5% (better) | 13.8% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 13.8% (better) | 8.6% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 58.7% (better) | 2.6% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 51.0% (better) | 2.3% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 7.0% (better) | −0.15% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 26.8% (better) | 17.3% |
| Net margin | 14.2% (better) | 13.1% |
| FCF margin | −23.0% | 1.9% (better) |
| Return on equity | 12.4% (better) | 11.7% |
| Return on invested capital | 8.4% (better) | 5.5% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.04 (better) | 1.21 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.47 (better) | 4.77 |
| Interest coverage | 3.3× (better) | 2.9× |
| Current ratio | 0.28 | 0.94 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.46 (better) | 1.22 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.0% | 3.9% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 49.1% | 63.0% |
| Years of dividend growth | 5 | 11 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 11.2% (better) | 3.5% |
| Buyback yield | – | −0.86% |
| Shareholder yield | 2.0% | 3.0% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 92.3% | 39.7% |
| Held by insiders | 1.5% | 12.3% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$4.7M | $198K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.6% | 1.0% |
Go deeper
- CPK stock overview
- CPK income statement
- CPK valuation and score
- RGCO stock overview
- RGCO income statement
- RGCO valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.