Helmerich & Payne vs Noble
HP and NE side by side, both in oil and gas field services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How HP and NE compare
Noble is the larger company, worth 1.8 times as much as Helmerich & Payne ($6.8B against $3.7B).
Helmerich & Payne grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (16.6% versus −13.0% for Noble).
Noble keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 1.8% compared with −3.4% at Helmerich & Payne.
Both pay dividends: Helmerich & Payne yields 2.7% and Noble 4.7%.
Noble scores higher on the StockData Score (7 against 6 for Helmerich & Payne), 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 | HP | NE |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $3.7B | $6.8B |
| Share price | $37.13 | $42.58 |
| Change, 1 year | 33.5% | 39.9% |
| Change, 5 years | 50.4% | 66.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.10 | 1.00 |
| Employees | 6,200 | 4,500 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 6 | 7 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Health score | 2 | 2 |
| Dividend score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 122× |
| P/S | 0.9× (better) | 2.3× |
| P/B | – | 1.6× |
| EV/EBITDA | 6.6× (better) | 23.3× |
| P/FCF | 11.8× | – |
| FCF yield | 8.5% | – |
| Fair value | $36.25 | $23.92 |
| Margin of safety | −2.4% (better) | −78.0% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 16.6% (better) | −13.0% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 16.1% | 27.8% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | −76.3% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −642% | −75.2% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 31.8% | – |
| Operating margin | 2.3% | 12.0% (better) |
| Net margin | −3.4% | 1.8% (better) |
| FCF margin | 7.9% | – |
| Return on equity | – | 1.2% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 3.0% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.44 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.98 (better) | 4.33 |
| Interest coverage | 0.9× | 2.3× (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.96 (better) | 1.76 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.99 | 2.10 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.7% | 4.7% (better) |
| Payout ratio | – | 602% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | −33.5% | – |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.00% |
| Shareholder yield | 2.7% | 4.7% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 102% | 87.5% |
| Held by insiders | 3.8% | 1.0% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$11.5M (better) | −$22.9M |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 6.8% | 8.9% |
Go deeper
- HP stock overview
- HP income statement
- HP valuation and score
- NE stock overview
- NE income statement
- NE valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.