California Resources vs SM Energy
CRC and SM 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 CRC and SM compare
SM Energy is the larger company, worth 1.8 times as much as California Resources ($7.8B against $4.3B).
SM Energy grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (108% versus −22.5% for California Resources).
SM Energy keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 13.7% compared with −3.8% at California Resources.
Both pay dividends: California Resources yields 3.4% and SM Energy 2.6%.
SM Energy scores higher on the StockData Score (12 against 10 for California 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 | CRC | SM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $4.3B | $7.8B |
| Share price | $47.88 | $32.77 |
| Change, 1 year | −0.42% | 69.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 18.1% | 8.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.70 | 0.99 |
| Employees | 2,500 | 1,241 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 | 12 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 8.0× |
| P/S | 1.3× | 1.1× (better) |
| P/B | 1.3× | 1.0× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 11.9× | 4.5× (better) |
| P/FCF | 11.0× | – |
| FCF yield | 9.1% | – |
| Fair value | $58.40 | $39.42 |
| Margin of safety | 18.0% (better) | 16.9% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −22.5% | 108% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | – | 22.9% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −118% | 29.0% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −119% | −34.7% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | – | 74.2% |
| Operating margin | −1.7% | 23.6% (better) |
| Net margin | −3.8% | 13.7% (better) |
| FCF margin | 12.1% | – |
| Return on equity | −3.6% | 15.0% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | −0.97% | 20.5% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.38 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.66 | – |
| Interest coverage | – | 4.2× |
| Current ratio | 0.66 (better) | 0.57 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.38 (better) | 1.27 |
| Piotroski F-score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 3.4% (better) | 2.6% |
| Payout ratio | – | 22.4% |
| Years of dividend growth | 4 | 4 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 109% |
| Buyback yield | 1.6% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 5.0% (better) | 2.6% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 103% | 96.7% |
| Held by insiders | 13.7% | 0.90% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$223M | −$1.6M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.8% | 5.5% |
Go deeper
- CRC stock overview
- CRC income statement
- CRC valuation and score
- SM stock overview
- SM income statement
- SM valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.