EOG Resources vs Expand Energy
EOG and EXE 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 EOG and EXE compare
EOG Resources is the larger company, worth 4.1 times as much as Expand Energy ($86.8B against $21.0B).
On earnings, Expand Energy is cheaper: it trades at 7.8× trailing earnings, against 12.9× for EOG Resources.
Expand Energy grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (59.3% versus 19.1% for EOG Resources).
EOG Resources keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 25.4% compared with 20.5% at Expand Energy.
Both pay dividends: EOG Resources yields 2.5% and Expand Energy 2.5%.
Expand Energy scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 12 for EOG 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 | EOG | EXE |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $86.8B | $21.0B |
| Share price | $165.54 | $90.55 |
| Change, 1 year | 56.2% | −9.8% |
| Change, 5 years | 74.0% | 37.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.52 | 0.58 |
| Employees | 3,400 | 1,600 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 | 16 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 4 | 4 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 12.9× | 7.8× (better) |
| P/S | 3.2× | 1.5× (better) |
| P/B | 2.7× | 1.1× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 6.5× | 3.6× (better) |
| P/FCF | – | 7.8× |
| FCF yield | – | 12.8% |
| Fair value | $163.57 | $111.34 |
| Margin of safety | −1.2% | 18.7% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 19.1% | 59.3% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 15.5% | 18.3% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 20.0% | 1250% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 24.6% | 2869% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 32.9% (better) | 26.9% |
| Net margin | 25.4% (better) | 20.5% |
| FCF margin | – | 19.7% |
| Return on equity | 22.5% (better) | 14.9% |
| Return on invested capital | 22.1% (better) | 12.9% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.25 | 0.19 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.22 (better) | 0.46 |
| Interest coverage | 33.0× (better) | 16.8× |
| Current ratio | 1.85 (better) | 0.96 |
| Altman Z-score | 4.26 (better) | 2.65 |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.5% | 2.5% (better) |
| Payout ratio | – | 27.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | 1 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 21.6% | – |
| Buyback yield | 3.3% (better) | 2.8% |
| Shareholder yield | 5.8% (better) | 5.3% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 96.5% | 95.3% |
| Held by insiders | 0.23% | 0.31% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$10.8M | $877K (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.1% | 4.2% |
Go deeper
- EOG stock overview
- EOG income statement
- EOG valuation and score
- EXE stock overview
- EXE income statement
- EXE valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.