CenterPoint Energy vs Eversource Energy
CNP and ES side by side, both in electric services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CNP and ES compare
CenterPoint Energy and Eversource Energy are about the same size, with market caps of $27.3B and $27.0B.
On earnings, Eversource Energy is cheaper: it trades at 18.6× trailing earnings, against 23.5× for CenterPoint Energy.
CenterPoint Energy grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (7.8% versus 7.8% for Eversource Energy).
Both pay dividends: CenterPoint Energy yields 2.2% and Eversource Energy 4.3%.
Eversource Energy scores higher on the StockData Score (8 against 7 for CenterPoint 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 | CNP | ES |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $27.3B | $27.0B |
| Share price | $41.19 | $71.73 |
| Change, 1 year | 4.1% | −2.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 55.1% | −14.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.40 | 0.39 |
| Employees | 3,712 | 11K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 7 | 8 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 23.5× | 18.6× (better) |
| P/S | 2.8× | 1.9× (better) |
| P/B | 2.3× | 1.7× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 12.2× | 10.3× (better) |
| P/FCF | – | 90.8× |
| PEG | 112.51 | 4.61 (better) |
| FCF yield | −10.4% | 1.1% (better) |
| Fair value | $36.79 | $80.53 |
| Margin of safety | −12.0% | 10.9% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 7.8% (better) | 7.8% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.8% | 8.8% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 11.5% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 10.8% | 65.7% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 5.1% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 100.0% | – |
| Operating margin | 24.4% (better) | 21.5% |
| Net margin | 11.8% | – |
| FCF margin | −28.8% | 2.1% (better) |
| Return on equity | 10.1% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 5.9% (better) | 5.5% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 2.02 | 1.78 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 5.61 | 5.16 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 2.3× (better) | 2.2× |
| Current ratio | 1.15 (better) | 0.80 |
| Altman Z-score | 0.88 (better) | 0.79 |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | – |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.2% | 4.3% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 52.3% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 3 | 11 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 5.8% |
| Shareholder yield | 2.2% | 4.3% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 105% | 86.1% |
| Held by insiders | 0.30% | 0.09% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $40.7K (better) | −$3.3M |
| Short interest, % of float | 7.5% | 2.8% |
Go deeper
- CNP stock overview
- CNP income statement
- CNP valuation and score
- ES stock overview
- ES income statement
- ES valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.