Dominion Energy vs Vistra
D and VST side by side, both in electric services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How D and VST compare
Dominion Energy is the larger company, worth 1.3 times as much as Vistra ($58.6B against $46.4B).
On earnings, Dominion Energy is cheaper: it trades at 19.7× trailing earnings, against 23.4× for Vistra.
Dominion Energy grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (17.1% versus 3.8% for Vistra).
Dominion Energy keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 16.9% compared with 11.6% at Vistra.
Both pay dividends: Dominion Energy yields 4.0% and Vistra 0.66%.
Vistra scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 12 for Dominion Energy), 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 | D | VST |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $58.6B | $46.4B |
| Share price | $66.62 | $138.37 |
| Change, 1 year | 12.9% | −30.6% |
| Change, 5 years | −12.9% | 575% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.34 | 1.08 |
| Employees | 15K | 6,390 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 | 13 (better) |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 19.7× (better) | 23.4× |
| P/S | 3.4× | 2.4× (better) |
| P/B | 2.0× (better) | 8.5× |
| EV/EBITDA | 16.3× | 12.1× (better) |
| P/FCF | – | 20.6× |
| PEG | 0.53 | – |
| FCF yield | – | 4.9% |
| Fair value | $68.35 | $139.28 |
| Margin of safety | 2.5% (better) | 0.65% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 17.1% (better) | 3.8% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 3.1% | 9.2% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 28.7% (better) | −7.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 28.0% (better) | −5.4% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 10.9% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 26.3% (better) | 18.5% |
| Net margin | 16.9% (better) | 11.6% |
| FCF margin | – | 11.7% |
| Return on equity | 10.5% | 43.1% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 5.2% | 12.4% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.78 (better) | 3.57 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 7.32 | 3.54 (better) |
| Interest coverage | – | 3.1× |
| Current ratio | 0.78 | 0.97 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 0.69 | 1.51 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 4.0% (better) | 0.66% |
| Payout ratio | 77.7% | 13.9% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | −5.0% | – |
| Buyback yield | −2.5% | 2.5% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 1.5% | 3.1% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 81.0% | 84.8% |
| Held by insiders | 0.12% | 6.5% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | −$51.8M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.8% | 3.3% |
Go deeper
- D stock overview
- D income statement
- D valuation and score
- VST stock overview
- VST income statement
- VST valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.