NiSource vs Sempra
NI and SREA side by side, both in combination electric and gas, and other utility. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How NI and SREA compare
NiSource is the larger company, worth 1.7 times as much as Sempra ($21.2B against $12.3B).
On earnings, Sempra is cheaper: it trades at 5.5× trailing earnings, against 22.5× for NiSource.
NiSource grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (15.3% versus 1.2% for Sempra).
Sempra keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 16.8% compared with 8.2% at NiSource.
Both pay dividends: NiSource yields 2.0% and Sempra 7.6%.
Sempra scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 6 for NiSource), 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 | NI | SREA |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $21.2B | $12.3B |
| Share price | $44.15 | $18.88 |
| Change, 1 year | 3.0% | −16.1% |
| Change, 5 years | 76.0% | −31.3% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.45 | 0.41 |
| Employees | 7,738 | 5,600 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 6 | 15 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 6 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Health score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 22.5× | 5.5× (better) |
| P/S | 1.9× | 0.9× (better) |
| P/B | 2.2× | 0.4× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 13.0× | 7.8× (better) |
| PEG | 4.81 | – |
| FCF yield | −7.4% (better) | −42.5% |
| Fair value | $40.73 | $48.39 |
| Margin of safety | −8.4% | 61.0% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 15.3% (better) | 1.2% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.8% (better) | 3.8% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 4.9% (better) | −16.0% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 3.2% (better) | −16.7% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | −15.6% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 86.4% | – |
| Operating margin | 16.6% | – |
| Net margin | 8.2% | 16.8% (better) |
| FCF margin | −13.7% (better) | −38.7% |
| Return on equity | 10.1% (better) | 7.1% |
| Return on invested capital | 5.7% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.91 | 1.12 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 5.68 (better) | 5.85 |
| Interest coverage | 2.4× | – |
| Current ratio | 0.50 | 1.64 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 0.85 (better) | 0.58 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.0% | 7.6% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 60.8% | 72.0% |
| Years of dividend growth | 9 | 15 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 5.9% (better) | 4.3% |
| Buyback yield | −0.30% | −0.18% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 1.7% | 7.4% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 96.4% | 92.2% |
| Held by insiders | 0.37% | 0.05% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$6.6M | −$6.1M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.3% | – |
Go deeper
- NI stock overview
- NI income statement
- NI valuation and score
- SREA stock overview
- SREA income statement
- SREA valuation and score
Other comparisons
- AEE vs NI
- AES vs NI
- CMS vs NI
- CMS.PB vs NI
- DUK vs NI
- ED vs NI
- EXC vs NI
- NI vs PCG
- NI vs PEG
- NI vs SRE
- NI vs UGI
- NI vs WEC
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.