RGC Resources vs Stabilis Solutions
RGCO and SLNG side by side, both in gas production and distribution. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How RGCO and SLNG compare
RGC Resources is the larger company, worth 3.3 times as much as Stabilis Solutions ($234M against $71.2M).
RGC Resources grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (13.8% versus −30.3% for Stabilis Solutions).
RGC Resources keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 13.1% compared with −17.4% at Stabilis Solutions.
RGC Resources pays a dividend yielding 3.9%; Stabilis Solutions does not pay one.
RGC Resources scores higher on the StockData Score (12 against 6 for Stabilis Solutions), 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 | RGCO | SLNG |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $234M | $71.2M |
| Share price | $22.43 | $3.83 |
| Change, 1 year | 5.4% | −19.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 1.5% | −37.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.38 | 0.29 |
| Employees | 106 | 85 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 (better) | 6 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Growth score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 16.7× | – |
| P/S | 2.2× | 1.4× (better) |
| P/B | 1.9× | 1.2× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 12.4× | – |
| P/FCF | 116× | 7.6× (better) |
| FCF yield | 0.86% | 13.2% (better) |
| Fair value | $22.00 | $5.34 |
| Margin of safety | −1.9% | 28.3% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 13.8% (better) | −30.3% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 8.6% | 10.4% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 2.6% (better) | −966% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 2.3% (better) | −1040% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −0.15% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | – | 20.5% |
| Operating margin | 17.3% | – |
| Net margin | 13.1% (better) | −17.4% |
| FCF margin | 1.9% | 18.6% (better) |
| Return on equity | 11.7% (better) | −14.0% |
| Return on invested capital | 5.5% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.21 | 0.10 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 4.77 | – |
| Interest coverage | 2.9× | – |
| Current ratio | 0.94 | 1.67 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.22 (better) | 0.98 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 3.9% | – |
| Payout ratio | 63.0% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 11 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 3.5% | – |
| Buyback yield | −0.86% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 3.0% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 39.7% | 5.0% |
| Held by insiders | 12.3% | 2.9% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $198K (better) | $64.2K |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.0% | 0.04% |
Go deeper
- RGCO stock overview
- RGCO income statement
- RGCO valuation and score
- SLNG stock overview
- SLNG income statement
- SLNG valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.