Patterson UTI Energy vs Valaris
PTEN and VAL 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 PTEN and VAL compare
Valaris is the larger company, worth 1.4 times as much as Patterson UTI Energy ($5.8B against $4.2B).
Patterson UTI Energy grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (0.01% versus −13.2% for Valaris).
Valaris keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 44.0% compared with −0.52% at Patterson UTI Energy.
Patterson UTI Energy pays a dividend yielding 3.5%; Valaris does not pay one.
Valaris scores higher on the StockData Score (13 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 | PTEN | VAL |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $4.2B | $5.8B |
| Share price | $10.97 | $84.14 |
| Change, 1 year | 83.8% | 49.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 49.0% | 147% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.09 | 0.88 |
| Employees | 7,900 | 5,070 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 8 | 13 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 3 | 3 |
| Dividend score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 6.3× |
| P/S | 0.9× (better) | 2.7× |
| P/B | 1.4× (better) | 1.8× |
| EV/EBITDA | 122× | 26.5× (better) |
| P/FCF | 15.7× | – |
| PEG | – | 0.08 |
| FCF yield | 6.4% (better) | −0.41% |
| Fair value | $10.66 | $117.41 |
| Margin of safety | −2.9% | 28.3% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 0.01% (better) | −13.2% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 33.8% (better) | 10.7% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 241% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 248% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | – | 24.8% |
| Operating margin | 0.86% | 11.3% (better) |
| Net margin | −0.52% | 44.0% (better) |
| FCF margin | 5.5% (better) | −1.1% |
| Return on equity | −0.79% | 33.9% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 0.80% | 7.2% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.40 | 0.34 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 21.49 | 2.27 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 0.6× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.73 (better) | 1.55 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.75 | 2.82 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 3.5% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 26.2% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.81% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 4.3% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 112% | 90.2% |
| Held by insiders | 1.9% | 45.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$33.9M | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 7.3% | 15.4% |
Go deeper
- PTEN stock overview
- PTEN income statement
- PTEN valuation and score
- VAL stock overview
- VAL income statement
- VAL valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.