Expand Energy vs Diamondback Energy
EXE and FANG 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 EXE and FANG compare
Diamondback Energy is the larger company, worth 2.8 times as much as Expand Energy ($59.4B against $21.0B).
On earnings, Expand Energy is cheaper: it trades at 7.8× trailing earnings, against 41.1× for Diamondback Energy.
Expand Energy grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (59.3% versus 21.4% for Diamondback Energy).
Expand Energy keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 20.5% compared with 8.6% at Diamondback Energy.
Both pay dividends: Expand Energy yields 2.5% and Diamondback Energy 2.0%.
Expand Energy scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 9 for Diamondback 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 | EXE | FANG |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $21.0B | $59.4B |
| Share price | $90.55 | $212.08 |
| Change, 1 year | −9.8% | 47.7% |
| Change, 5 years | 37.6% | 86.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.58 | 0.66 |
| Employees | 1,600 | 1,762 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 3 | 3 |
| Dividend score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 7.8× (better) | 41.1× |
| P/S | 1.5× (better) | 3.5× |
| P/B | 1.1× (better) | 1.6× |
| EV/EBITDA | 3.6× (better) | 12.3× |
| P/FCF | 7.8× | – |
| FCF yield | 12.8% | – |
| Fair value | $111.34 | $123.05 |
| Margin of safety | 18.7% (better) | −72.3% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 59.3% (better) | 21.4% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 18.3% | 39.8% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 1250% (better) | −61.8% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 2869% (better) | −63.3% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 26.9% (better) | 6.3% |
| Net margin | 20.5% (better) | 8.6% |
| FCF margin | 19.7% | – |
| Return on equity | 14.9% (better) | 3.8% |
| Return on invested capital | 12.9% (better) | 1.7% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.19 (better) | 0.33 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.46 (better) | 1.92 |
| Interest coverage | 16.8× | – |
| Current ratio | 0.96 (better) | 0.47 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.65 (better) | 1.72 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 3 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.5% (better) | 2.0% |
| Payout ratio | 27.5% | 80.4% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 21.3% |
| Buyback yield | 2.8% (better) | 0.00% |
| Shareholder yield | 5.3% (better) | 2.0% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 95.3% | 72.0% |
| Held by insiders | 0.31% | 23.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $877K (better) | −$8.9B |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.2% | 3.4% |
Go deeper
- EXE stock overview
- EXE income statement
- EXE valuation and score
- FANG stock overview
- FANG income statement
- FANG valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.