NRG Energy vs Southern
NRG and SO side by side, both in electric services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How NRG and SO compare
Southern is the larger company, worth 5.3 times as much as NRG Energy ($108B against $20.2B).
On earnings, Southern is cheaper: it trades at 22.6× trailing earnings, against 25.4× for NRG Energy.
NRG Energy grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (12.8% versus 6.4% for Southern).
Southern keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 15.4% compared with 2.6% at NRG Energy.
Both pay dividends: NRG Energy yields 1.9% and Southern 3.2%.
NRG Energy scores higher on the StockData Score (7 against 6 for Southern), 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 | NRG | SO |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $20.2B | $108B |
| Share price | $96.06 | $93.71 |
| Change, 1 year | −46.2% | 0.21% |
| Change, 5 years | 165% | 48.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.09 | 0.23 |
| Employees | 17K | 30K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 7 (better) | 6 |
| Valuation score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 1 | 1 |
| Health score | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 25.4× | 22.6× (better) |
| P/S | 0.6× (better) | 3.6× |
| EV/EBITDA | 11.8× (better) | 13.2× |
| P/FCF | 58.0× | – |
| PEG | – | 3.57 |
| FCF yield | 1.7% (better) | −3.0% |
| Fair value | $58.34 | $83.91 |
| Margin of safety | −64.7% | −11.7% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 12.8% (better) | 6.4% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 27.6% (better) | 7.7% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 62.6% (better) | 8.7% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 71.8% (better) | 7.0% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 14.1% (better) | 6.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 18.8% | – |
| Operating margin | 6.1% | 24.2% (better) |
| Net margin | 2.6% | 15.4% (better) |
| FCF margin | 1.1% (better) | −10.8% |
| Financial health | ||
| Net debt / EBITDA | 6.28 | 5.32 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 2.0× | – |
| Current ratio | 0.97 (better) | 0.79 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.41 (better) | 0.85 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.9% | 3.2% (better) |
| Payout ratio | – | 66.6% |
| Years of dividend growth | 6 | 16 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 8.0% (better) | 3.0% |
| Buyback yield | 8.1% (better) | −3.9% |
| Shareholder yield | 10.1% (better) | −0.65% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 94.5% | 72.6% |
| Held by insiders | 4.5% | 0.12% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$5.3B | −$5.6M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.1% | – |
Go deeper
- NRG stock overview
- NRG income statement
- NRG valuation and score
- SO stock overview
- SO income statement
- SO valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.