Kinder Morgan vs Targa Resources
KMI and TRGP side by side, both in gas production and distribution. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How KMI and TRGP compare
Kinder Morgan and Targa Resources are about the same size, with market caps of $75.4B and $67.5B.
On earnings, Kinder Morgan is cheaper: it trades at 21.7× trailing earnings, against 30.1× for Targa Resources.
Kinder Morgan grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (12.5% versus −2.0% for Targa Resources).
Kinder Morgan keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 19.3% compared with 13.5% at Targa Resources.
Both pay dividends: Kinder Morgan yields 3.5% and Targa Resources 1.4%.
Kinder Morgan scores higher on the StockData Score (10 against 9 for Targa 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 | KMI | TRGP |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $75.4B | $67.5B |
| Share price | $33.87 | $314.99 |
| Change, 1 year | 30.8% | 108% |
| Change, 5 years | 99.8% | 456% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.47 | 0.62 |
| Employees | 11K | 3,570 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 (better) | 9 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Performance score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 21.7× (better) | 30.1× |
| P/S | 4.2× | 4.0× (better) |
| P/B | 2.4× (better) | 18.5× |
| EV/EBITDA | 14.1× (better) | 15.8× |
| P/FCF | 23.9× (better) | 91.2× |
| PEG | 3.13 | 1.01 (better) |
| FCF yield | 4.2% (better) | 1.1% |
| Fair value | $29.54 | $223.96 |
| Margin of safety | −14.7% (better) | −40.6% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 12.5% (better) | −2.0% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.7% | 15.6% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 27.3% | 38.4% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 26.8% | 50.1% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 93.9% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 66.6% (better) | 43.2% |
| Operating margin | 29.0% (better) | 22.9% |
| Net margin | 19.3% (better) | 13.5% |
| FCF margin | 17.6% (better) | 4.4% |
| Return on equity | 11.1% | 72.6% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 6.4% | 14.7% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.02 (better) | 5.20 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 4.18 | 3.44 (better) |
| Current ratio | 0.46 | 0.77 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.34 | 2.79 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 3.5% (better) | 1.4% |
| Payout ratio | 75.8% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 8 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 2.3% | 25.4% (better) |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.49% |
| Shareholder yield | 3.5% (better) | 1.9% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 69.7% | 95.1% |
| Held by insiders | 12.1% | 1.3% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$2.8M (better) | −$34.3M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.4% | 2.5% |
Go deeper
- KMI stock overview
- KMI income statement
- KMI valuation and score
- TRGP stock overview
- TRGP income statement
- TRGP valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.