COP Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Diamondback Energy has a net margin of 15.79% compared to ConocoPhillips's net margin of 24.92%. ConocoPhillips's return on equity of 20.22% beat Diamondback Energy's return on equity of 14.68%.

ConocoPhillips has a consensus price target of $132.61, signalling upside risk potential of 30.5%. On the other hand Diamondback Energy has an analysts' consensus of $214.17 which suggests that it could grow by 25.25%. Given that ConocoPhillips has higher upside potential than Diamondback Energy, analysts believe ConocoPhillips is more attractive than Diamondback Energy.

ConocoPhillips has a beta of 1.188, which suggesting that the stock is 18.801% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Diamondback Energy has a beta of 1.879, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 87.947%.

ConocoPhillips has a quarterly dividend of $0.78 per share corresponding to a yield of 3.07%. Diamondback Energy offers a yield of 4.85% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.90 per share. ConocoPhillips pays 50.95% of its earnings as a dividend. Diamondback Energy pays out 45.94% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

ConocoPhillips quarterly revenues are $13B, which are larger than Diamondback Energy quarterly revenues of $2.6B. ConocoPhillips's net income of $2.1B is higher than Diamondback Energy's net income of $659M. Notably, ConocoPhillips's price-to-earnings ratio is 12.08x while Diamondback Energy's PE ratio is 9.79x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for ConocoPhillips is 2.16x versus 3.30x for Diamondback Energy. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Matador Resources has a net margin of 15.79% compared to ConocoPhillips's net margin of 28.87%. ConocoPhillips's return on equity of 20.22% beat Matador Resources's return on equity of 20.48%.

ConocoPhillips has a consensus price target of $132.61, signalling upside risk potential of 30.5%. On the other hand Matador Resources has an analysts' consensus of $74.88 which suggests that it could grow by 24.63%. Given that ConocoPhillips has higher upside potential than Matador Resources, analysts believe ConocoPhillips is more attractive than Matador Resources.

ConocoPhillips has a beta of 1.188, which suggesting that the stock is 18.801% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Matador Resources has a beta of 3.245, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 224.547%.

ConocoPhillips has a quarterly dividend of $0.78 per share corresponding to a yield of 3.07%. Matador Resources offers a yield of 1.42% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.25 per share. ConocoPhillips pays 50.95% of its earnings as a dividend. Matador Resources pays out 9.12% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

ConocoPhillips quarterly revenues are $13B, which are larger than Matador Resources quarterly revenues of $860.1M. ConocoPhillips's net income of $2.1B is higher than Matador Resources's net income of $248.3M. Notably, ConocoPhillips's price-to-earnings ratio is 12.08x while Matador Resources's PE ratio is 7.96x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for ConocoPhillips is 2.16x versus 2.21x for Matador Resources. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Valero Energy has a net margin of 15.79% compared to ConocoPhillips's net margin of 1.11%. ConocoPhillips's return on equity of 20.22% beat Valero Energy's return on equity of 13.03%.

ConocoPhillips has a consensus price target of $132.61, signalling upside risk potential of 30.5%. On the other hand Valero Energy has an analysts' consensus of $147.60 which suggests that it could grow by 17.9%. Given that ConocoPhillips has higher upside potential than Valero Energy, analysts believe ConocoPhillips is more attractive than Valero Energy.

ConocoPhillips has a beta of 1.188, which suggesting that the stock is 18.801% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Valero Energy has a beta of 1.423, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 42.299%.

ConocoPhillips has a quarterly dividend of $0.78 per share corresponding to a yield of 3.07%. Valero Energy offers a yield of 3.42% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $1.07 per share. ConocoPhillips pays 50.95% of its earnings as a dividend. Valero Energy pays out 16.44% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

ConocoPhillips quarterly revenues are $13B, which are smaller than Valero Energy quarterly revenues of $32.9B. ConocoPhillips's net income of $2.1B is higher than Valero Energy's net income of $364M. Notably, ConocoPhillips's price-to-earnings ratio is 12.08x while Valero Energy's PE ratio is 11.23x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for ConocoPhillips is 2.16x versus 0.30x for Valero Energy. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Exxon Mobil has a net margin of 15.79% compared to ConocoPhillips's net margin of 9.81%. ConocoPhillips's return on equity of 20.22% beat Exxon Mobil's return on equity of 14.21%.

ConocoPhillips has a consensus price target of $132.61, signalling upside risk potential of 30.5%. On the other hand Exxon Mobil has an analysts' consensus of $129.94 which suggests that it could grow by 21.52%. Given that ConocoPhillips has higher upside potential than Exxon Mobil, analysts believe ConocoPhillips is more attractive than Exxon Mobil.

ConocoPhillips has a beta of 1.188, which suggesting that the stock is 18.801% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Exxon Mobil has a beta of 0.907, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 9.284%.

ConocoPhillips has a quarterly dividend of $0.78 per share corresponding to a yield of 3.07%. Exxon Mobil offers a yield of 3.59% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.99 per share. ConocoPhillips pays 50.95% of its earnings as a dividend. Exxon Mobil pays out 41.49% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

ConocoPhillips quarterly revenues are $13B, which are smaller than Exxon Mobil quarterly revenues of $87.8B. ConocoPhillips's net income of $2.1B is lower than Exxon Mobil's net income of $8.6B. Notably, ConocoPhillips's price-to-earnings ratio is 12.08x while Exxon Mobil's PE ratio is 13.32x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for ConocoPhillips is 2.16x versus 1.32x for Exxon Mobil. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.