Chesapeake Utilities vs DT Midstream
CPK and DTM 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 CPK and DTM compare
DT Midstream is the larger company, worth 3.6 times as much as Chesapeake Utilities ($12.2B against $3.4B).
On earnings, Chesapeake Utilities is cheaper: it trades at 17.1× trailing earnings, against 26.0× for DT Midstream.
Chesapeake Utilities grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (64.5% versus 13.4% for DT Midstream).
DT Midstream keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 35.4% compared with 14.2% at Chesapeake Utilities.
Both pay dividends: Chesapeake Utilities yields 2.0% and DT Midstream 2.9%.
Chesapeake Utilities scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 11 for DT Midstream), 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 | CPK | DTM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $3.4B | $12.2B |
| Share price | $140.10 | $119.73 |
| Change, 1 year | 4.0% | 3.8% |
| Change, 5 years | 6.0% | 154% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.28 | 0.55 |
| Employees | 1,300 | 588 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 (better) | 11 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Performance score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 17.1× (better) | 26.0× |
| P/S | 2.4× (better) | 9.2× |
| P/B | 2.0× (better) | 2.5× |
| EV/EBITDA | 10.1× (better) | 16.5× |
| P/FCF | – | 22.9× |
| PEG | 2.95 (better) | 6.32 |
| FCF yield | −9.4% | 4.4% (better) |
| Fair value | $168.22 | $85.20 |
| Margin of safety | 16.7% (better) | −40.5% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 64.5% (better) | 13.4% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 13.8% (better) | 10.5% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 58.7% (better) | 16.9% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 51.0% (better) | 16.2% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 7.0% (better) | 5.9% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 26.8% | 49.4% (better) |
| Net margin | 14.2% | 35.4% (better) |
| FCF margin | −23.0% | 40.0% (better) |
| Return on equity | 12.4% (better) | 9.9% |
| Return on invested capital | 8.4% (better) | 6.2% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.04 | 0.68 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.47 | 3.26 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 3.3× | 4.0× (better) |
| Current ratio | 0.28 | 1.16 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 1.46 | 1.83 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 7 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.0% | 2.9% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 49.1% | 73.2% |
| Years of dividend growth | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 11.2% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 2.0% | 2.9% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 92.3% | 87.6% |
| Held by insiders | 1.5% | 0.57% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$4.7M | −$6.2K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.6% | 7.6% |
Go deeper
- CPK stock overview
- CPK income statement
- CPK valuation and score
- DTM stock overview
- DTM income statement
- DTM valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.