Diamondback Energy vs Permian Resources
FANG and PR side by side, both in crude petroleum and natural gas. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How FANG and PR compare
Diamondback Energy is the larger company, worth 2.7 times as much as Permian Resources ($51.8B against $19.3B).
On earnings, Permian Resources is cheaper: it trades at 12.0× trailing earnings, against 25.2× for Diamondback Energy.
Permian Resources grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (22.8% versus 21.1% for Diamondback Energy).
Permian Resources keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 25.0% compared with 11.0% at Diamondback Energy.
Both pay dividends: Diamondback Energy yields 2.4% and Permian Resources 2.7%.
Permian Resources scores higher on the StockData Score (11 against 9 for Diamondback 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 | FANG | PR |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $51.8B | $19.3B |
| Share price | $184.93 | $23.05 |
| Change, 1 year | 26.5% | 73.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 81.0% | 247% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.69 | 0.78 |
| Employees | 1,762 | 515 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 9 | 11 (better) |
| Valuation score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 3 | 3 |
| Dividend score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 25.2× | 12.0× (better) |
| P/S | 2.8× (better) | 3.0× |
| P/B | 1.3× (better) | 1.6× |
| EV/EBITDA | 9.3× | 8.7× (better) |
| Fair value | $135.75 | $21.82 |
| Margin of safety | −36.2% | −5.6% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 21.1% | 22.8% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 39.8% | 54.2% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −51.1% | 96.4% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −49.0% | 76.1% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 12.6% | 40.1% (better) |
| Net margin | 11.0% | 25.0% (better) |
| Return on equity | 5.3% | 14.3% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 3.5% | 14.4% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.34 | 0.25 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.66 | 1.16 (better) |
| Interest coverage | – | 10.3× |
| Current ratio | 0.55 (better) | 0.50 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.62 | 2.58 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.4% | 2.7% (better) |
| Payout ratio | – | 33.1% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 21.3% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.00% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 2.4% | 2.7% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 72.0% | 91.3% |
| Held by insiders | 23.8% | 7.5% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$8.6B | −$90.7M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 3.3% | 3.8% |
Go deeper
- FANG stock overview
- FANG income statement
- FANG valuation and score
- PR stock overview
- PR income statement
- PR valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.