Halliburton vs SLB
HAL and SLB side by side, both in oil and gas field services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How HAL and SLB compare
SLB is the larger company, worth 2.8 times as much as Halliburton ($75.2B against $27.2B).
On earnings, Halliburton is cheaper: it trades at 13.8× trailing earnings, against 24.7× for SLB.
SLB grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (4.6% versus 1.5% for Halliburton).
Halliburton keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 8.9% compared with 8.4% at SLB.
Both pay dividends: Halliburton yields 2.1% and SLB 2.3%.
Halliburton scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 8 for SLB), 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 | HAL | SLB |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $27.2B | $75.2B |
| Share price | $32.93 | $50.96 |
| Change, 1 year | 18.8% | 38.1% |
| Change, 5 years | 49.4% | 69.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.78 | 0.74 |
| Employees | 46K | 109K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 15 (better) | 8 |
| Valuation score | 3 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 0 | 0 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 3 | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 13.8× (better) | 24.7× |
| P/S | 1.2× (better) | 2.0× |
| P/B | 2.4× (better) | 2.9× |
| EV/EBITDA | 6.4× (better) | 11.6× |
| P/FCF | 17.0× | 16.5× (better) |
| FCF yield | 5.9% | 6.1% (better) |
| Fair value | $34.65 | $38.85 |
| Margin of safety | 5.0% (better) | −31.2% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 1.5% | 4.6% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.0% (better) | 8.6% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 52.9% (better) | −15.0% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 58.3% (better) | −20.5% |
| Profitability | ||
| Operating margin | 12.6% | – |
| Net margin | 8.9% (better) | 8.4% |
| FCF margin | 7.1% | 12.4% (better) |
| Return on equity | 18.8% (better) | 12.0% |
| Return on invested capital | 26.6% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.01 (better) | 0.43 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.44 | 1.05 (better) |
| Current ratio | 2.02 (better) | 1.39 |
| Altman Z-score | 3.46 (better) | 2.81 |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 4 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.1% | 2.3% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 28.4% | 55.9% |
| Buyback yield | 3.0% (better) | 2.3% |
| Shareholder yield | 5.0% (better) | 4.6% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 88.9% | 92.9% |
| Held by insiders | 0.43% | 0.18% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$38.4M | −$26.1M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.0% | 3.9% |
Go deeper
- HAL stock overview
- HAL income statement
- HAL valuation and score
- SLB stock overview
- SLB income statement
- SLB valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.