AQN vs CLNE

For growth investors, Clean Energy Fuels Corp.

(CLNE) is the stronger pick with 2. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -3. 5% for Algonquin Power & Utilities Corp. (AQN). Analysts rate Clean Energy Fuels Corp. (CLNE) a "Buy" — based on 22 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.

Over the past 5 years, Algonquin Power & Utilities Corp.

(AQN) delivered a total return of -44. 3%, compared to -73. 8% for Clean Energy Fuels Corp. (CLNE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AQN returned +32. 5% versus CLNE's -26. 9%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Algonquin Power & Utilities Corp.

(AQN) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 35β versus Clean Energy Fuels Corp. 's 1. 19β — meaning CLNE is approximately 240% more volatile than AQN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Clean Energy Fuels Corp. (CLNE) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 18% versus 108% for Algonquin Power & Utilities Corp. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Clean Energy Fuels Corp.

(CLNE) is pulling ahead at 2. 2% versus -3. 5% for Algonquin Power & Utilities Corp. (AQN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Clean Energy Fuels Corp. grew EPS -173. 0% year-over-year, compared to -61. 3% for Algonquin Power & Utilities Corp.. Over a 3-year CAGR, AQN leads at 0. 7% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.

Clean Energy Fuels Corp.

(CLNE) is the more profitable company, earning -52. 3% net margin versus -59. 5% for Algonquin Power & Utilities Corp. — meaning it keeps -52. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: AQN leads at 19. 2% versus -22. 1% for CLNE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AQN leads at 74. 4%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.

Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CLNE: 51.

5% to $3. 50.

In this comparison, AQN (5.

9% yield) pays a dividend. CLNE does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Algonquin Power & Utilities Corp.

(AQN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 35), 5. 9% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (AQN: +32. 5%, CLNE: -26. 9%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.

These companies operate in different sectors (AQN (Utilities) and CLNE (Energy)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: AQN is a small-cap income-oriented stock; CLNE is a small-cap quality compounder stock. AQN pays a dividend while CLNE does not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.