Kinder Morgan vs Williams Companies
KMI and WMB 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 WMB compare
Williams Companies is the larger company, worth 1.2 times as much as Kinder Morgan ($90.9B against $75.4B).
On earnings, Kinder Morgan is cheaper: it trades at 21.7× trailing earnings, against 29.6× for Williams Companies.
Kinder Morgan grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (12.5% versus 8.7% for Williams Companies).
Williams Companies keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 25.2% compared with 19.3% at Kinder Morgan.
Both pay dividends: Kinder Morgan yields 3.5% and Williams Companies 2.8%.
Kinder Morgan scores higher on the StockData Score (10 against 8 for Williams Companies), 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 | WMB |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $75.4B | $90.9B |
| Share price | $33.87 | $74.35 |
| Change, 1 year | 30.8% | 30.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 99.8% | 160% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.47 | 0.53 |
| Employees | 11K | 5,987 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 10 (better) | 8 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 21.7× (better) | 29.6× |
| P/S | 4.2× (better) | 7.5× |
| P/B | 2.4× (better) | 6.9× |
| EV/EBITDA | 14.1× (better) | 17.7× |
| P/FCF | 23.9× | – |
| PEG | 3.13 (better) | 3.44 |
| FCF yield | 4.2% (better) | −0.12% |
| Fair value | $29.54 | $50.67 |
| Margin of safety | −14.7% (better) | −46.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 12.5% (better) | 8.7% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.7% | 9.1% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 27.3% (better) | 26.5% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 26.8% (better) | 26.1% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 93.9% (better) | 66.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 66.6% | – |
| Operating margin | 29.0% | 38.2% (better) |
| Net margin | 19.3% | 25.2% (better) |
| FCF margin | 17.6% (better) | −0.88% |
| Return on equity | 11.1% | 24.0% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 6.4% | 8.5% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.02 (better) | 2.33 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 4.18 (better) | 4.37 |
| Interest coverage | – | 3.1× |
| Current ratio | 0.46 | 0.48 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.34 (better) | 1.32 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 3.5% (better) | 2.8% |
| Payout ratio | 75.8% | 81.5% |
| Years of dividend growth | 8 | 8 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 2.3% | 4.6% (better) |
| Buyback yield | – | −0.01% |
| Shareholder yield | 3.5% (better) | 2.8% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 69.7% | 89.8% |
| Held by insiders | 12.1% | 0.49% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$2.8M (better) | −$11.0M |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.4% | 2.2% |
Go deeper
- KMI stock overview
- KMI income statement
- KMI valuation and score
- WMB stock overview
- WMB income statement
- WMB valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.