Nabors Industries vs Patterson UTI Energy
NBR and PTEN 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 NBR and PTEN compare
Patterson UTI Energy is the larger company, worth 3.5 times as much as Nabors Industries ($5.1B against $1.4B).
Nabors Industries grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (6.1% versus −6.9% for Patterson UTI Energy).
Nabors Industries keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 7.7% compared with −1.9% at Patterson UTI Energy.
Patterson UTI Energy pays a dividend yielding 2.9%; Nabors Industries does not pay one.
Nabors Industries scores higher on the StockData Score (12 against 8 for Patterson UTI 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 | NBR | PTEN |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $1.4B | $5.1B |
| Share price | $90.78 | $13.32 |
| Change, 1 year | 74.6% | 105% |
| Change, 5 years | −11.5% | 42.3% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.35 | 1.04 |
| Employees | 14K | 7,900 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 (better) | 8 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Health score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 6.7× | – |
| P/S | 0.5× (better) | 1.1× |
| P/B | 2.7× | 1.6× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 7.7× | – |
| P/FCF | 23.5× (better) | 28.6× |
| FCF yield | 4.3% (better) | 3.5% |
| Fair value | $201.78 | $11.27 |
| Margin of safety | 55.0% (better) | −18.1% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 6.1% (better) | −6.9% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 8.3% | 33.8% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 13.9% (better) | −1.1% |
| Net margin | 7.7% (better) | −1.9% |
| FCF margin | 1.9% | 3.8% (better) |
| Return on equity | 58.0% (better) | −2.8% |
| Return on invested capital | 12.6% (better) | −0.92% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 3.90 | 0.40 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.60 | – |
| Interest coverage | 2.3× (better) | −0.7× |
| Current ratio | 1.89 (better) | 1.75 |
| Altman Z-score | 0.91 | 1.96 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 2.9% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 26.2% |
| Buyback yield | – | 0.85% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 3.7% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 76.2% | 112% |
| Held by insiders | 35.9% | 1.9% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $205K (better) | −$33.9M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 9.4% | 8.2% |
Go deeper
- NBR stock overview
- NBR income statement
- NBR valuation and score
- PTEN stock overview
- PTEN income statement
- PTEN valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.