CNR vs HCC vs BTU vs AMR

For growth investors, Core Natural Resources, Inc.

(CNR) is the stronger pick with 93. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -14. 8% for Alpha Metallurgical Resources, Inc. (AMR). Alpha Metallurgical Resources, Inc. (AMR) offers the better valuation at 13. 5x trailing P/E (20. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Core Natural Resources, Inc. (CNR) a "Buy" — based on 17 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, Alpha Metallurgical Resources, Inc.

(AMR) is the cheapest at 13. 5x versus Warrior Met Coal, Inc. at 81. 3x. On forward P/E, Peabody Energy Corporation is actually cheaper at 7. 9x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Alpha Metallurgical Resources, Inc.

(AMR) delivered a total return of +1410%, compared to +387. 7% for Peabody Energy Corporation (BTU). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AMR returned +1321% versus BTU's -10. 1%. 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), Peabody Energy Corporation (BTU) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

18β versus Alpha Metallurgical Resources, Inc. 's 0. 92β — meaning AMR is approximately 404% more volatile than BTU relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Alpha Metallurgical Resources, Inc. (AMR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 14% for Peabody Energy Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Core Natural Resources, Inc.

(CNR) is pulling ahead at 93. 8% versus -14. 8% for Alpha Metallurgical Resources, Inc. (AMR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Alpha Metallurgical Resources, Inc. grew EPS -71. 0% year-over-year, compared to -130. 9% for Core Natural Resources, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CNR leads at 22. 2% 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.

Alpha Metallurgical Resources, Inc.

(AMR) is the more profitable company, earning 6. 3% net margin versus -3. 7% for Core Natural Resources, Inc. — meaning it keeps 6. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: AMR leads at 7. 7% versus -5. 2% for CNR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AMR leads at 11. 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.

On forward earnings alone, Peabody Energy Corporation (BTU) trades at 7.

9x forward P/E versus 24. 3x for Core Natural Resources, Inc. — 16. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for BTU: 51. 6% to $36. 50.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Peabody Energy Corporation (BTU) offers the highest yield at 1. 2%, versus 0. 1% for Alpha Metallurgical Resources, Inc. (AMR).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Core Natural Resources, Inc.

(CNR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 20), 0. 6% yield, +321. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CNR: +321. 6%, AMR: +1321%), 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.

In terms of investment character: CNR is a small-cap high-growth stock; HCC is a small-cap quality compounder stock; BTU is a small-cap quality compounder stock; AMR is a small-cap deep-value stock. CNR, BTU pay a dividend while HCC, AMR do not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. 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.