FTS vs ATO

For growth investors, Atmos Energy Corporation (ATO) is the stronger pick with 12.

9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 8% for Fortis Inc. (FTS). Fortis Inc. (FTS) offers the better valuation at 22. 5x trailing P/E (15. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Fortis Inc. (FTS) a "Hold" — based on 12 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.

On trailing P/E, Fortis Inc.

(FTS) is the cheapest at 22. 5x versus Atmos Energy Corporation at 24. 4x. On forward P/E, Fortis Inc. is actually cheaper at 15. 2x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Atmos Energy Corporation wins at 2. 48x versus Fortis Inc. 's 3. 02x.

Over the past 5 years, Atmos Energy Corporation (ATO) delivered a total return of +91.

7%, compared to +42. 7% for Fortis Inc. (FTS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ATO returned +179. 6% versus FTS's +130. 8%. 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), Fortis Inc.

(FTS) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 26β versus Atmos Energy Corporation's -0. 00β — meaning ATO is approximately -99% more volatile than FTS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Atmos Energy Corporation (ATO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 69% versus 134% for Fortis Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Atmos Energy Corporation (ATO) is pulling ahead at 12.

9% versus 5. 8% for Fortis Inc. (FTS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Atmos Energy Corporation grew EPS 9. 2% year-over-year, compared to 4. 9% for Fortis Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ATO leads at 3. 8% 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.

Atmos Energy Corporation (ATO) is the more profitable company, earning 25.

5% net margin versus 14. 8% for Fortis Inc. — meaning it keeps 25. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ATO leads at 33. 2% versus 28. 7% for FTS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FTS leads at 72. 3%, 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.

The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.

By this metric, Atmos Energy Corporation (ATO) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 2. 48x versus Fortis Inc. 's 3. 02x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Fortis Inc. (FTS) trades at 15. 2x forward P/E versus 21. 9x for Atmos Energy Corporation — 6. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FTS: 10. 5% to $62. 00.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Fortis Inc. (FTS) offers the highest yield at 1. 9%, versus 1. 9% for Atmos Energy Corporation (ATO).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Fortis Inc.

(FTS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 26), 1. 9% yield, +130. 8% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FTS: +130. 8%, ATO: +179. 6%), 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.

Both stocks operate in the Utilities sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

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.