Marathon Petroleum vs Phillips 66
MPC and PSX side by side, both in petroleum refining. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How MPC and PSX compare
Marathon Petroleum and Phillips 66 are about the same size, with market caps of $113B and $101B.
On earnings, Phillips 66 is cheaper: it trades at 8.3× trailing earnings, against 13.9× for Marathon Petroleum.
Phillips 66 grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (27.5% versus 15.0% for Marathon Petroleum).
Phillips 66 keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 7.5% compared with 5.6% at Marathon Petroleum.
Both pay dividends: Marathon Petroleum yields 0.99% and Phillips 66 1.9%.
Phillips 66 scores higher on the StockData Score (17 against 12 for Marathon Petroleum), 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 | MPC | PSX |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $113B | $101B |
| Share price | $402.84 | $258.68 |
| Change, 1 year | 105% | 86.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 568% | 271% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.56 | 0.61 |
| Employees | 19K | 13K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 | 17 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Growth score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Performance score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 4 | 4 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 13.9× | 8.3× (better) |
| P/S | 0.7× | 0.6× (better) |
| P/B | 5.9× | 2.9× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.3× | – |
| P/FCF | 8.8× | – |
| FCF yield | 11.4% | – |
| Fair value | $336.68 | $367.44 |
| Margin of safety | −19.7% | 29.6% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 15.0% | 27.5% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 13.7% | 15.6% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 301% | 736% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 331% | 754% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 12.5% | 15.1% (better) |
| Operating margin | 9.2% | – |
| Net margin | 5.6% | 7.5% (better) |
| FCF margin | 8.4% | – |
| Return on equity | 47.9% (better) | 41.1% |
| Return on invested capital | 26.0% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.72 | 0.54 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.44 | – |
| Interest coverage | 8.7× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.25 | 1.34 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 3.87 | 3.93 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.99% | 1.9% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 13.6% | 15.9% |
| Years of dividend growth | 4 | 14 (better) |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 10.0% (better) | 5.7% |
| Buyback yield | 4.4% (better) | 3.0% |
| Shareholder yield | 5.4% (better) | 4.9% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 78.0% | 81.6% |
| Held by insiders | 0.30% | 0.23% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$13.9M (better) | −$55.6M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.3% | 1.9% |
Go deeper
- MPC stock overview
- MPC income statement
- MPC valuation and score
- PSX stock overview
- PSX income statement
- PSX valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.