Patterson UTI Energy vs Transocean
PTEN and RIG 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 PTEN and RIG compare
Transocean is the larger company, worth 1.5 times as much as Patterson UTI Energy ($5.9B against $4.1B).
Patterson UTI Energy keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of −0.52% compared with −40.2% at Transocean.
Patterson UTI Energy pays a dividend yielding 3.6%; Transocean does not pay one.
Patterson UTI Energy scores higher on the StockData Score (8 against 4 for Transocean), 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 | PTEN | RIG |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $4.1B | $5.9B |
| Share price | $10.67 | $5.32 |
| Change, 1 year | 67.0% | 25.8% |
| Change, 5 years | 45.0% | 78.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.08 | 1.25 |
| Employees | 7,900 | 5,600 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 8 (better) | 4 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 1 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/S | 0.8× (better) | 1.4× |
| P/B | 1.3× | 0.7× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 119× | – |
| P/FCF | 15.3× | 6.6× (better) |
| FCF yield | 6.5% | 15.2% (better) |
| Fair value | $10.64 | $3.68 |
| Margin of safety | −0.31% (better) | −44.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 0.01% | – |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 33.8% (better) | 4.7% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | – | 41.6% |
| Operating margin | 0.86% (better) | −24.2% |
| Net margin | −0.52% (better) | −40.2% |
| FCF margin | 5.5% | 22.0% (better) |
| Return on equity | −0.79% (better) | −18.7% |
| Return on invested capital | 0.80% (better) | −5.6% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.40 (better) | 0.61 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 21.49 | – |
| Interest coverage | 0.6× (better) | −1.7× |
| Current ratio | 1.73 (better) | 1.59 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.73 (better) | −0.03 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 3.6% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 26.2% | – |
| Buyback yield | 0.83% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 4.4% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 112% | 90.0% |
| Held by insiders | 1.9% | 19.2% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$33.9M | −$2.4M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 2 |
| Short interest, % of float | 7.3% | 35.8% |
Go deeper
- PTEN stock overview
- PTEN income statement
- PTEN valuation and score
- RIG stock overview
- RIG income statement
- RIG valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.