BSM vs CTRA

For growth investors, Black Stone Minerals, L.

P. (BSM) is the stronger pick with -3. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -49. 6% for Coterra Energy Inc. (CTRA). Black Stone Minerals, L. P. (BSM) offers the better valuation at 10. 4x trailing P/E (14. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Black Stone Minerals, L. P. (BSM) a "Buy" — based on 16 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, Black Stone Minerals, L.

P. (BSM) is the cheapest at 10. 4x versus Coterra Energy Inc. at 14. 5x. On forward P/E, Coterra Energy Inc. is actually cheaper at 11. 5x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Coterra Energy Inc. wins at 0. 33x versus Black Stone Minerals, L. P. 's 0. 69x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Coterra Energy Inc.

(CTRA) delivered a total return of +125. 2%, compared to +94. 7% for Black Stone Minerals, L. P. (BSM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CTRA returned +68. 7% versus BSM's +60. 6%. 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), Coterra Energy Inc.

(CTRA) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 03β versus Black Stone Minerals, L. P. 's 0. 15β — meaning BSM is approximately 408% more volatile than CTRA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Black Stone Minerals, L. P. (BSM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 14% versus 27% for Coterra Energy Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Black Stone Minerals, L.

P. (BSM) is pulling ahead at -3. 9% versus -49. 6% for Coterra Energy Inc. (CTRA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Coterra Energy Inc. grew EPS 49. 0% year-over-year, compared to 11. 3% for Black Stone Minerals, L. P.. Over a 3-year CAGR, BSM leads at -18. 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.

Black Stone Minerals, L.

P. (BSM) is the more profitable company, earning 71. 0% net margin versus 62. 4% for Coterra Energy Inc. — meaning it keeps 71. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CTRA leads at 89. 1% versus 61. 8% for BSM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BSM leads at 74. 9%, 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, Coterra Energy Inc. (CTRA) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 33x versus Black Stone Minerals, L. P. 's 0. 69x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Coterra Energy Inc. (CTRA) trades at 11. 5x forward P/E versus 14. 7x for Black Stone Minerals, L. P. — 3. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for BSM: 29. 8% to $17. 33.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Black Stone Minerals, L. P. (BSM) offers the highest yield at 10. 1%, versus 2. 8% for Coterra Energy Inc. (CTRA).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Coterra Energy Inc.

(CTRA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 03), 2. 8% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CTRA: +68. 7%, BSM: +60. 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 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.