Dominion Energy vs Vistra
D 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 D and VST compare
Dominion Energy is the larger company, worth 1.3 times as much as Vistra ($59.9B against $44.8B).
On earnings, Vistra is cheaper: it trades at 18.0× trailing earnings, against 22.6× for Dominion Energy.
Dominion Energy grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (21.5% versus 19.8% for Vistra).
Dominion Energy keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 14.0% compared with 13.1% at Vistra.
Both pay dividends: Dominion Energy yields 3.9% and Vistra 0.68%.
Vistra scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 7 for Dominion 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 | D | VST |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $59.9B | $44.8B |
| Share price | $68.06 | $133.45 |
| Change, 1 year | 11.8% | −29.1% |
| Change, 5 years | −8.3% | 566% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.32 | 1.11 |
| Employees | 15K | 6,390 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 7 | 18 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 2 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Dividend score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 22.6× | 18.0× (better) |
| P/S | 3.1× | 2.2× (better) |
| P/B | 2.0× (better) | 7.1× |
| EV/EBITDA | 17.2× | 10.0× (better) |
| P/FCF | – | 17.2× |
| PEG | 0.60 | – |
| FCF yield | – | 5.8% |
| Fair value | $62.96 | $166.91 |
| Margin of safety | −8.1% | 20.0% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 21.5% (better) | 19.8% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 3.1% | 9.2% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 4.8% | 135% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 2.0% | 168% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 10.9% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 22.5% (better) | 20.6% |
| Net margin | 14.0% (better) | 13.1% |
| FCF margin | – | 12.7% |
| Return on equity | 9.4% | 47.0% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 4.7% | 14.7% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.85 (better) | 3.35 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 7.85 | 2.90 (better) |
| Interest coverage | – | 3.8× |
| Current ratio | 0.88 | 1.16 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 0.68 | 1.58 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 3.9% (better) | 0.68% |
| Payout ratio | 86.7% | 11.4% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | −5.0% | – |
| Buyback yield | −2.4% | 2.6% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 1.5% | 3.3% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 81.0% | 84.8% |
| Held by insiders | 0.12% | 6.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | −$33.5M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.8% | 3.3% |
Go deeper
- D stock overview
- D income statement
- D 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.