Comprehensive Stock Comparison
Compare SM Energy Company (SM) vs ConocoPhillips (COP) Stock
Analyze side-by-side fundamentals, valuation, growth, and profitability to decide which stock is the better buy.
Selected Stocks
Add up to 10 tickers. Use presets or search to get started.
Quick Verdict
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | SM | 18.1% revenue growth vs COP's 9.3% |
| Value | SM | Lower P/E (6.3x vs 23.0x) |
| Quality / Margins | SM | 20.5% net margin vs COP's 13.3% |
| Stability / Safety | COP | Beta 0.99 vs SM's 1.70, lower leverage |
| Dividends | SM | 3.5% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs COP's 2.9% |
| Momentum (1Y) | COP | +17.7% vs SM's -26.8% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | SM | 7.0% ROA vs COP's 6.5%, ROIC 0.2% vs 10.7% |
Who Each Stock Is For
Income & stability
Growth exposure
Long-term compounding (10Y)
Sleep-well-at-night portfolio
Defensive / Recession hedge
Business Model
What each company does and how it makes money
SM Energy is an independent oil and gas exploration and production company focused on acquiring, developing, and operating hydrocarbon assets in Texas. It generates revenue primarily from selling crude oil, natural gas, and natural gas liquids — with oil contributing the majority of production value — through its operations in the Midland Basin and South Texas. The company's competitive advantage lies in its concentrated, high-quality acreage positions in prolific Texas basins, which provide operational efficiency and predictable drilling inventory.
ConocoPhillips is a global independent exploration and production company that finds, produces, and sells crude oil, natural gas, and natural gas liquids. It generates revenue primarily from selling hydrocarbons produced from its diverse portfolio — including unconventional shale plays in North America, conventional assets worldwide, and oil sands in Canada — with no refining or marketing operations. The company's competitive advantage lies in its low-cost position, large-scale resource base, and operational expertise across multiple geographies and resource types.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Financial Metrics Comparison
Side-by-side fundamentals across 2 stocks. BestLagging
Financial Scorecard
COP leads in 3 of 6 categories (Financial Metrics, Total Returns). SM leads in 3 (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency).
Financial Metrics (TTM)
COP is the larger business by revenue, generating $59.7B annually — 18.9x SM's $3.2B. SM is the more profitable business, keeping 20.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to COP's 13.3%. On growth, COP holds the edge at -0.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | SMSM Energy Company | COPConocoPhillips |
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $3.2B | $59.7B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $1.2B | $23.2B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $648M | $7.9B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $169M | $16.8B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +35.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +0.5% | +19.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +20.5% | +13.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +5.3% | +28.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -14.1% | -0.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -42.3% | -38.4% |
Valuation Metrics
At 4.1x trailing earnings, SM trades at a 77% valuation discount to COP's 17.9x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, SM's 3.7x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than COP's 6.7x.
| Metric | SMSM Energy Company | COPConocoPhillips |
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.7B | $139.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $4.6B | $156.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 4.10x | 17.90x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 6.30x | 23.03x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 3.74x | 6.71x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.84x | 2.33x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.55x | 2.11x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 4.63x | 8.29x |
Profitability & Efficiency
SM delivers a 13.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $13 in annual profit, vs $12 for COP. COP carries lower financial leverage with a 0.36x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to SM's 0.48x.
| Metric | SMSM Energy Company | COPConocoPhillips |
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +13.5% | +12.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +7.0% | +6.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +0.2% | +10.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +0.2% | +10.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.48x | 0.36x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.9B | $16.9B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $368M | $6.5B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2.3B | $23.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 11.99x |
Total Returns (with DRIP)
A $10,000 investment in COP five years ago would be worth $24,904 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $17,987 for SM. Over the past 12 months, COP leads with a +17.7% total return vs SM's -26.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors COP at 6.3% vs SM's -5.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | SMSM Energy Company | COPConocoPhillips |
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +20.9% | +18.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -26.8% | +17.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -14.2% | +20.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +79.9% | +149.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +476.8% | +306.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -5.0% | +6.3% |
Risk & Volatility
COP is the less volatile stock with a 0.99 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than SM's 1.70 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. COP currently trades 99.7% from its 52-week high vs SM's 69.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | SMSM Energy Company | COPConocoPhillips |
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.70x | 0.99x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $33.14 | $113.80 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $17.45 | $79.88 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +69.8% | +99.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 51.0 | 62.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 5.0M | 7.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates SM as "Buy" and COP as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 24.8% upside for SM (target: $29) vs 2.9% for COP (target: $117). For income investors, SM offers the higher dividend yield at 3.46% vs COP's 2.94%.
| Metric | SMSM Energy Company | COPConocoPhillips |
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $28.86 | $116.79 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 53 | 52 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.5% | +2.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 4 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.80 | $3.34 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.5% | +3.6% |
Historical Charts
Charts are rendered on first load. Hover for details.
Chart 1Total Return — 5 Years (Rebased to 100)
| Stock | Mar 20 | Feb 26 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| SM Energy Company (SM) | 100 | 612.62 | +512.6% |
| ConocoPhillips (COP) | 100 | 206.76 | +106.8% |
ConocoPhillips (COP) returned +149% over 5 years vs SM Energy Company (SM)'s +80%. A $10,000 investment in COP 5 years ago would be worth $24,904 today (including dividends reinvested).
Chart 2Revenue Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| SM Energy Company (SM) | $1.2B | $3.2B | +167.2% |
| ConocoPhillips (COP) | $23.9B | $59.7B | +149.8% |
SM Energy Company's revenue grew from $1.2B (2016) to $3.2B (2025) — a 11.5% CAGR. ConocoPhillips's revenue grew from $23.9B (2016) to $59.7B (2025) — a 10.7% CAGR.
Chart 3Net Margin Trend — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| SM Energy Company (SM) | -64.2% | 20.5% | +132.0% |
| ConocoPhillips (COP) | -15.1% | 13.3% | +187.8% |
SM Energy Company's net margin went from -64% (2016) to 21% (2025). ConocoPhillips's net margin went from -15% (2016) to 13% (2025).
Chart 4P/E Ratio History — 7 Years
| Stock | 2018 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| SM Energy Company (SM) | 1.7 | 3.3 | +94.1% |
| ConocoPhillips (COP) | 11.7 | 14.8 | +26.5% |
SM Energy Company has traded in a 2x–102x P/E range over 6 years; current trailing P/E is ~4x. ConocoPhillips has traded in a 8x–15x P/E range over 7 years; current trailing P/E is ~18x.
Chart 5EPS Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| SM Energy Company (SM) | -9.9 | 5.64 | +157.0% |
| ConocoPhillips (COP) | -2.9 | 6.34 | +318.6% |
SM Energy Company's EPS grew from $-9.90 (2016) to $5.64 (2025). ConocoPhillips's EPS grew from $-2.90 (2016) to $6.34 (2025).
Chart 6Free Cash Flow — 5 Years
SM Energy Company generated $573M FCF in 2025 (+19% vs 2021). ConocoPhillips generated $17B FCF in 2025 (+44% vs 2021).
SM vs COP: Frequently Asked Questions
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SM or COP a better buy right now?
SM Energy Company (SM) offers the better valuation at 4.1x trailing P/E (6.3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate SM Energy Company (SM) a "Buy" — based on 53 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.
02Which has the better valuation — SM or COP?
On trailing P/E, SM Energy Company (SM) is the cheapest at 4.1x versus ConocoPhillips at 17.9x. On forward P/E, SM Energy Company is actually cheaper at 6.3x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SM or COP?
Over the past 5 years, ConocoPhillips (COP) delivered a total return of +149.0%, compared to +79.9% for SM Energy Company (SM). A $10,000 investment in COP five years ago would be worth approximately $25K today (assuming dividends reinvested). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: SM returned +476.8% versus COP's +306.3%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — SM or COP?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), ConocoPhillips (COP) is the lower-risk stock at 0.99β versus SM Energy Company's 1.70β — meaning SM is approximately 72% more volatile than COP relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, ConocoPhillips (COP) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 36% versus 48% for SM Energy Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which has better profit margins — SM or COP?
SM Energy Company (SM) is the more profitable company, earning 20.5% net margin versus 13.3% for ConocoPhillips — meaning it keeps 20.5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: COP leads at 19.8% versus 0.5% for SM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — COP leads at 35.2%, 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.
06Is SM or COP more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, SM Energy Company (SM) trades at 6.3x forward P/E versus 23.0x for ConocoPhillips — 16.7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for SM: 24.8% to $28.86.
07Which pays a better dividend — SM or COP?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends. SM Energy Company (SM) offers the highest yield at 3.5%, versus 2.9% for ConocoPhillips (COP).
08Is SM or COP better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, ConocoPhillips (COP) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.99), 2.9% yield, +306.3% 10Y return). SM Energy Company (SM) carries a higher beta of 1.70 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (COP: +306.3%, SM: +476.8%), 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.
09What are the main differences between SM and COP?
Both stocks operate in the Energy 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that beat both.