Marathon Petroleum vs Valero Energy
MPC and VLO 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 VLO compare
Marathon Petroleum and Valero Energy are about the same size, with market caps of $113B and $101B.
On earnings, Valero Energy is cheaper: it trades at 8.2× trailing earnings, against 13.9× for Marathon Petroleum.
Valero Energy grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (24.6% versus 15.0% for Marathon Petroleum).
Valero Energy keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 8.4% compared with 5.6% at Marathon Petroleum.
Both pay dividends: Marathon Petroleum yields 0.99% and Valero Energy 1.3%.
Valero Energy scores higher on the StockData Score (21 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 | VLO |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $113B | $101B |
| Share price | $402.84 | $363.71 |
| Change, 1 year | 105% | 103% |
| Change, 5 years | 568% | 427% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.56 | 0.59 |
| Employees | 19K | 9,811 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 | 21 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Performance score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 4 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 13.9× | 8.2× (better) |
| P/S | 0.7× | 0.7× (better) |
| P/B | 5.9× | 3.6× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.3× | 5.5× (better) |
| P/FCF | 8.8× | – |
| FCF yield | 11.4% | – |
| Fair value | $336.68 | $489.64 |
| Margin of safety | −19.7% | 25.7% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 15.0% | 24.6% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 13.7% (better) | 13.6% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 301% | 766% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 331% | 827% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 12.5% (better) | 12.3% |
| Operating margin | 9.2% | 11.5% (better) |
| Net margin | 5.6% | 8.4% (better) |
| FCF margin | 8.4% | – |
| Return on equity | 47.9% | 50.1% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 26.0% | 46.6% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.72 | 0.39 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.44 | 0.06 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 8.7× | 30.9× (better) |
| Current ratio | 1.25 | 1.72 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 3.87 | 6.22 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.99% | 1.3% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 13.6% | 10.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 10.0% (better) | 2.9% |
| Buyback yield | 4.4% | 7.2% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 5.4% | 8.5% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 78.0% | 88.2% |
| Held by insiders | 0.30% | 0.42% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$13.9M | −$7.7M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.3% | 2.5% |
Go deeper
- MPC stock overview
- MPC income statement
- MPC valuation and score
- VLO stock overview
- VLO income statement
- VLO valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.