Oil & Gas Exploration & Production
Compare Stocks
3 / 10Stock Comparison
TPET vs CALI vs TUSK
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Auto - Dealerships
Conglomerates
TPET vs CALI vs TUSK — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Oil & Gas Exploration & Production | Auto - Dealerships | Conglomerates |
| Market Cap | $4M | $203M | $113M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $399K | $514M | $103M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-7M | $-1M | $-64M |
| Gross Margin | 50.0% | 0.4% | 2.7% |
| Operating Margin | -13.2% | -0.2% | -27.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | 50.9x | 23.5x |
| Total Debt | $467K | $60M | $3M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $882K | $3M | $102M |
TPET vs CALI vs TUSK — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Apr 23 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trio Petroleum Corp. (TPET) | 100 | 1.1 | -98.9% |
| China Auto Logistic… (CALI) | 100 | 100.7 | +0.7% |
| Mammoth Energy Serv… (TUSK) | 100 | 63.7 | -36.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TPET vs CALI vs TUSK
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TPET is the clearest fit if your priority is growth.
- 87.0% revenue growth vs TUSK's -76.4%
CALI carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- beta 0.01
- Rev growth 4.6%, EPS growth 133.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 0.6%
- 49.7% 10Y total return vs TUSK's -78.5%
TUSK is the clearest fit if your priority is value.
- Lower P/E (23.5x vs 50.9x)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 87.0% revenue growth vs TUSK's -76.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (23.5x vs 50.9x) | |
| Quality / Margins | -0.3% margin vs TPET's -18.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.01 vs TUSK's 0.66 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 3 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +2.9% vs TPET's -63.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -0.9% ROA vs TPET's -54.7%, ROIC 0.1% vs -38.5% |
TPET vs CALI vs TUSK — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
TPET vs CALI vs TUSK — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CALI leads in 3 of 6 categories
TPET leads 1 • TUSK leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CALI leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CALI is the larger business by revenue, generating $514M annually — 1290.1x TPET's $398,734. CALI is the more profitable business, keeping -0.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to TPET's -18.3%. On growth, TPET holds the edge at +123.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $398,734 | $514M | $103M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$5M | -$969,068 | -$15M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$7M | -$1M | -$64M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$3M | $466,701 | -$54M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +50.0% | +0.4% | +2.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -13.2% | -0.2% | -27.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -18.3% | -0.3% | -61.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -6.7% | +0.1% | -52.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +123.0% | +30.1% | -82.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +60.5% | -3.6% | +156.3% |
Valuation Metrics
TPET leads this category, winning 2 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 23.5x trailing earnings, TUSK trades at a 54% valuation discount to CALI's 50.9x P/E.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4M | $203M | $113M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $4M | $260M | $15M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.58x | 50.92x | 23.50x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 829.19x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 10.52x | 0.44x | 2.56x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.37x | 8.63x | 0.44x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
CALI leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CALI delivers a -5.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-5 in annual profit, vs $-63 for TPET. TUSK carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CALI's 2.55x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CALI scores 6/9 vs TUSK's 5/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -63.5% | -5.4% | -25.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -54.7% | -0.9% | -18.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -38.5% | +0.1% | -25.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -51.6% | +0.8% | -23.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.04x | 2.55x | 0.01x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$414,983 | $57M | -$99M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $882,162 | $3M | $102M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $467,179 | $60M | $3M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -11.03x | 0.35x | -82.84x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CALI leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CALI five years ago would be worth $5,429,458,654 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $102 for TPET. Over the past 12 months, CALI leads with a +2.9% total return vs TPET's -63.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CALI at 2.8% vs TPET's -77.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -43.4% | +0.4% | +19.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -63.2% | +2.9% | -6.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.8% | +8.5% | -36.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.0% | +54294486.5% | -35.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.0% | +4974.3% | -78.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -77.3% | +2.8% | -14.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — TPET and CALI each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TPET is the less volatile stock with a -2.78 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than TUSK's 0.66 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CALI currently trades 99.3% from its 52-week high vs TPET's 18.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -2.78x | 0.01x | 0.66x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $2.50 | $50.79 | $3.12 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.35 | $50.04 | $1.72 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +18.5% | +99.3% | +75.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 39.1 | 42.5 | 47.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 44.1M | 84K | 296K |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | — | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — | $7.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | — | 13 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 3 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
CALI leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). TPET leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
TPET vs CALI vs TUSK: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TPET or CALI or TUSK a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Trio Petroleum Corp.
(TPET) is the stronger pick with 87. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -76. 4% for Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. (TUSK). Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. (TUSK) offers the better valuation at 23. 5x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. (TUSK) a "Hold" — based on 13 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 — TPET or CALI or TUSK?
On trailing P/E, Mammoth Energy Services, Inc.
(TUSK) is the cheapest at 23. 5x versus China Auto Logistics Inc. at 50. 9x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TPET or CALI or TUSK?
Over the past 5 years, China Auto Logistics Inc.
(CALI) delivered a total return of +542945%, compared to -99. 0% for Trio Petroleum Corp. (TPET). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CALI returned +49. 7% versus TPET's -99. 0%. 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 — TPET or CALI or TUSK?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Trio Petroleum Corp.
(TPET) is the lower-risk stock at -2. 78β versus Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. 's 0. 66β — meaning TUSK is approximately -124% more volatile than TPET relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. (TUSK) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 3% for China Auto Logistics Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TPET or CALI or TUSK?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Trio Petroleum Corp.
(TPET) is pulling ahead at 87. 0% versus -76. 4% for Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. (TUSK). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: China Auto Logistics Inc. grew EPS 133. 2% year-over-year, compared to 81. 5% for Trio Petroleum Corp.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CALI leads at 0. 6% 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.
06Which has better profit margins — TPET or CALI or TUSK?
China Auto Logistics Inc.
(CALI) is the more profitable company, earning 0. 9% net margin versus -1826. 3% for Trio Petroleum Corp. — meaning it keeps 0. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CALI leads at 0. 1% versus -1322. 2% for TPET. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — TUSK leads at 45. 5%, 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.
07Which pays a better dividend — TPET or CALI or TUSK?
None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.
All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.
08Is TPET or CALI or TUSK better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Trio Petroleum Corp.
(TPET) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -2. 78)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (TPET: -99. 0%, TUSK: -78. 5%), 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 TPET and CALI and TUSK?
These companies operate in different sectors (TPET (Energy) and CALI (Consumer Cyclical) and TUSK (Industrials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: TPET is a small-cap high-growth stock; CALI is a small-cap quality compounder stock; TUSK is a small-cap quality compounder stock. 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 outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.