Head to head
SM Energy vs ConocoPhillips
Side-by-side on the measures that matter, with a plain-English read. Full detail: SM · COP
SM
SM Energy
35.25+0.43%
1-year price shape — +45% over the period
Quant Rating B · 80/100
vs
COP
ConocoPhillips
129.84+0.38%
1-year price shape — +41% over the period
Quant Rating B · 79/100
1-year performance, rebased to 100
SM Energy edges it on the scoreable measures. SM Energy has the highest Quant Rating (80); SM Energy has done best over the past year (+45%); SM Energy trades cheapest on trailing earnings.
| SM | COP | |
|---|---|---|
| Snapshot | ||
| Sector | Oil & Gas E&P | Oil & Gas E&P |
| Last price | 35.25 | 129.84 |
| Change today | +0.43% | +0.38% |
| 1-year return | +45.3% | +40.6% |
| Market cap | $8.38B | $155.98B |
| 52-week range | 17.03 – 41.56 | 82.95 – 141.62 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E (TTM) | 6.25 | 17.17 |
| P/E percentile, own 5-yr range | 72nd | 81st |
| P/B | 1.07 | 2.39 |
| Dividend yield | 2.95% | 2.54% |
| Profitability & growth | ||
| EPS (TTM) | 5.64 | 6.35 |
| Net profit (TTM) | $1.34B | $7.63B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $5.15B | $63.35B |
| Revenue growth (YoY) | +174.6% | +36.8% |
| Gross margin | 40.0% | 27.7% |
| Operating margin | 32.5% | 21.9% |
| Net margin | 19.4% | 14.6% |
| Free cash flow (TTM) | $743.00M | $10.06B |
| Ownership & sentiment | ||
| Institutional ownership | 99.4% | 86.2% |
| Insider activity (12mo) | 27 buy / 18 sell | 21 buy / 27 sell |
| Short interest (% of float) | 5.7% | 1.3% |
| Analyst consensus | 77% buy / 23% hold (13) | 84% buy / 16% hold (19) |
| Analyst price target | $43 (+23%) | $149 (+14%) |
| StockVane view | ||
| StockVane Quant Rating | B (80) | B (79) |
| Company | ||
| Employees | 1,241 | 9,900 |
| Founded | 1908 | 1875 |
▲ marks the more favourable stock(s) on measures with a clear direction (lower P/E, higher yield, higher Quant Rating, better 1-year return). Analyst consensus counts each covering institution once, at its most recent rating. Not a recommendation. Quant Rating method: Data & Methodology.