ATO vs NWN

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

9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 11. 8% for Northwest Natural Holding Company (NWN). Northwest Natural Holding Company (NWN) offers the better valuation at 18. 1x trailing P/E (16. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Atmos Energy Corporation (ATO) a "Hold" — based on 20 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, Northwest Natural Holding Company (NWN) is the cheapest at 18.

1x versus Atmos Energy Corporation at 24. 4x. On forward P/E, Northwest Natural Holding Company is actually cheaper at 16. 4x. 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 Northwest Natural Holding Company's 4. 55x.

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

7%, compared to +8. 5% for Northwest Natural Holding Company (NWN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ATO returned +179. 6% versus NWN's +22. 0%. 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), Northwest Natural Holding Company (NWN) is the lower-risk stock at -0.

05β versus Atmos Energy Corporation's -0. 00β — meaning ATO is approximately -94% more volatile than NWN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Atmos Energy Corporation (ATO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 69% versus 187% for Northwest Natural Holding Company — 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 11. 8% for Northwest Natural Holding Company (NWN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Northwest Natural Holding Company grew EPS 36. 5% year-over-year, compared to 9. 2% for Atmos Energy Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, NWN leads at 7. 5% 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 8. 8% for Northwest Natural Holding Company — 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 31. 4% for NWN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ATO leads at 52. 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.

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 Northwest Natural Holding Company's 4. 55x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Northwest Natural Holding Company (NWN) trades at 16. 4x forward P/E versus 21. 9x for Atmos Energy Corporation — 5. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for NWN: 13. 9% to $57. 00.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Northwest Natural Holding Company (NWN) offers the highest yield at 3. 8%, versus 1. 9% for Atmos Energy Corporation (ATO).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Atmos Energy Corporation (ATO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.

00), 1. 9% yield, +179. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ATO: +179. 6%, NWN: +22. 0%), 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.

In terms of investment character: ATO is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; NWN is a small-cap income-oriented 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.