NRG Energy vs Vistra
NRG and VST 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 VST compare
Vistra is the larger company, worth 2.3 times as much as NRG Energy ($46.4B against $20.2B).
On earnings, Vistra is cheaper: it trades at 23.4× trailing earnings, against 25.4× for NRG Energy.
NRG Energy grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (12.8% versus 3.8% for Vistra).
Vistra keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 11.6% compared with 2.6% at NRG Energy.
Both pay dividends: NRG Energy yields 1.9% and Vistra 0.66%.
Vistra scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 7 for NRG 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 | NRG | VST |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $20.2B | $46.4B |
| Share price | $96.06 | $138.37 |
| Change, 1 year | −46.2% | −30.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 165% | 575% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.09 | 1.08 |
| Employees | 17K | 6,390 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 7 | 13 (better) |
| Valuation score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 1 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Dividend score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 25.4× | 23.4× (better) |
| P/S | 0.6× (better) | 2.4× |
| P/B | – | 8.5× |
| EV/EBITDA | 11.8× (better) | 12.1× |
| P/FCF | 58.0× | 20.6× (better) |
| FCF yield | 1.7% | 4.9% (better) |
| Fair value | $58.34 | $139.28 |
| Margin of safety | −64.7% | 0.65% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 12.8% (better) | 3.8% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 27.6% (better) | 9.2% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 62.6% (better) | −7.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 71.8% (better) | −5.4% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 14.1% (better) | 10.9% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 18.8% | – |
| Operating margin | 6.1% | 18.5% (better) |
| Net margin | 2.6% | 11.6% (better) |
| FCF margin | 1.1% | 11.7% (better) |
| Return on equity | – | 43.1% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 12.4% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 3.57 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 6.28 | 3.54 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 2.0× | 3.1× (better) |
| Current ratio | 0.97 | 0.97 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.41 | 1.51 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.9% (better) | 0.66% |
| Payout ratio | – | 13.9% |
| Years of dividend growth | 6 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 8.0% | – |
| Buyback yield | 8.1% (better) | 2.5% |
| Shareholder yield | 10.1% (better) | 3.1% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 94.5% | 84.8% |
| Held by insiders | 4.5% | 6.5% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$5.3B | −$51.8M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.1% | 3.3% |
Go deeper
- NRG stock overview
- NRG income statement
- NRG valuation and score
- VST stock overview
- VST income statement
- VST valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.