Regulated Electric
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
EMA vs GEV vs PWR vs NEE vs SO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Renewable Utilities
Engineering & Construction
Regulated Electric
Regulated Electric
EMA vs GEV vs PWR vs NEE vs SO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Regulated Electric | Renewable Utilities | Engineering & Construction | Regulated Electric | Regulated Electric |
| Market Cap | $15.75B | $281.02B | $112.65B | $194.60B | $104.20B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $8.79B | $39.38B | $29.99B | $27.93B | $30.17B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $1.09B | $9.38B | $1.12B | $8.18B | $4.36B |
| Gross Margin | 39.1% | 19.9% | 13.6% | 47.8% | 43.1% |
| Operating Margin | 21.8% | 3.9% | 5.8% | 29.5% | 24.1% |
| Forward P/E | 19.6x | 37.6x | 57.4x | 23.1x | 20.2x |
| Total Debt | $21.62B | $0.00 | $1.19B | $95.62B | $65.82B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $365M | $8.85B | $440M | $2.81B | $1.64B |
EMA vs GEV vs PWR vs NEE vs SO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Emera Incorporated (EMA) | 100 | 148.1 | +48.1% |
| GE Vernova Inc. (GEV) | 100 | 764.7 | +664.7% |
| Quanta Services, In… (PWR) | 100 | 289.0 | +189.0% |
| NextEra Energy, Inc. (NEE) | 100 | 146.0 | +46.0% |
| The Southern Company (SO) | 100 | 128.8 | +28.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: EMA vs GEV vs PWR vs NEE vs SO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
EMA ranks third and is worth considering specifically for value.
- Lower P/E (19.6x vs 20.2x)
GEV has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in momentum and efficiency.
- +157.4% vs SO's +3.6%
- 15.2% ROA vs EMA's 2.4%, ROIC 27.9% vs 3.5%
PWR is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 19.8%, EPS growth 12.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 18.4%
- 31.4% 10Y total return vs GEV's 7.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.30, Low D/E 13.2%, current ratio 1.14x
- Beta 1.30, yield 0.1%, current ratio 1.14x
NEE is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and valuation efficiency is your priority.
- Dividend streak 30 yrs, beta 0.21, yield 2.4%
- PEG 1.33 vs SO's 3.45
- 29.3% margin vs PWR's 3.7%
- Beta 0.21 vs GEV's 1.76
SO is the clearest fit if your priority is dividends.
- 2.9% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs NEE's 2.4%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 19.8% revenue growth vs GEV's 8.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (19.6x vs 20.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 29.3% margin vs PWR's 3.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.21 vs GEV's 1.76 | |
| Dividends | 2.9% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs NEE's 2.4% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +157.4% vs SO's +3.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 15.2% ROA vs EMA's 2.4%, ROIC 27.9% vs 3.5% |
EMA vs GEV vs PWR vs NEE vs SO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
EMA vs GEV vs PWR vs NEE vs SO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
EMA leads in 2 of 6 categories
GEV leads 2 • NEE leads 1 • PWR leads 0 • SO leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NEE leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
GEV is the larger business by revenue, generating $39.4B annually — 4.5x EMA's $8.8B. NEE is the more profitable business, keeping 29.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PWR's 3.7%. On growth, PWR holds the edge at +26.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $8.8B | $39.4B | $30.0B | $27.9B | $30.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $3.2B | $2.2B | $2.4B | $15.5B | $13.3B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $1.1B | $9.4B | $1.1B | $8.2B | $4.4B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$1.7B | $3.6B | $1.7B | -$3.8B | -$3.8B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +39.1% | +19.9% | +13.6% | +47.8% | +43.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +21.8% | +3.9% | +5.8% | +29.5% | +24.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +12.4% | +23.8% | +3.7% | +29.3% | +14.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -19.7% | +9.2% | +5.6% | -13.6% | -12.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +14.4% | +16.1% | +26.3% | +7.3% | +8.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -57.7% | +18.2% | +51.0% | +160.0% | -0.8% |
Valuation Metrics
EMA leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 21.1x trailing earnings, EMA trades at a 81% valuation discount to PWR's 110.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), NEE offers better value at 1.64x vs PWR's 6.40x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $15.7B | $281.0B | $112.7B | $194.6B | $104.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $31.3B | $272.2B | $113.4B | $287.4B | $168.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 21.07x | 59.12x | 110.40x | 28.36x | 23.58x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 19.56x | 37.62x | 57.40x | 23.07x | 20.21x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 6.40x | 1.64x | 4.03x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 14.99x | 121.45x | 45.68x | 18.73x | 12.66x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.59x | 7.38x | 3.97x | 7.08x | 3.53x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.59x | 23.47x | 12.61x | 2.93x | 2.64x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 75.73x | 69.50x | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
GEV leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
GEV delivers a 79.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $80 in annual profit, vs $8 for EMA. PWR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.13x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to SO's 1.69x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), GEV scores 6/9 vs PWR's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +8.1% | +79.7% | +13.0% | +12.7% | +11.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +2.4% | +15.2% | +4.8% | +3.9% | +2.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +3.5% | +27.9% | +11.8% | +4.1% | +5.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +4.1% | +6.6% | +11.3% | +4.7% | +5.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.62x | — | 0.13x | 1.44x | 1.69x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $21.3B | -$8.8B | $748M | $92.8B | $64.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $365M | $8.8B | $440M | $2.8B | $1.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $21.6B | $0 | $1.2B | $95.6B | $65.8B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.50x | — | 6.27x | 1.99x | 2.51x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
GEV leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in GEV five years ago would be worth $79,830 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $13,643 for EMA. Over the past 12 months, GEV leads with a +157.4% total return vs SO's +3.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GEV at 99.9% vs NEE's 9.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +8.2% | +54.0% | +70.8% | +16.1% | +6.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +21.9% | +157.4% | +132.1% | +42.0% | +3.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +34.0% | +698.3% | +345.2% | +31.0% | +35.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +36.4% | +698.3% | +651.1% | +38.2% | +60.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +102.1% | +698.3% | +3143.9% | +266.0% | +137.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +10.2% | +99.9% | +64.5% | +9.4% | +10.7% |
Risk & Volatility
EMA leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
EMA is the less volatile stock with a -0.25 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than GEV's 1.76 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. EMA currently trades 96.5% from its 52-week high vs GEV's 88.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.25x | 1.76x | 1.30x | 0.21x | -0.15x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $54.06 | $1181.95 | $788.72 | $98.75 | $100.84 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $41.90 | $387.03 | $315.45 | $63.88 | $83.09 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +96.5% | +88.5% | +95.2% | +94.5% | +91.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 48.3 | 66.5 | 87.0 | 54.3 | 43.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 251K | 2.4M | 1.1M | 8.7M | 4.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — NEE and SO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: EMA as "Hold", GEV as "Buy", PWR as "Buy", NEE as "Buy", SO as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 7.8% upside for SO (target: $100) vs -13.8% for PWR (target: $647). For income investors, SO offers the higher dividend yield at 2.94% vs NEE's 2.40%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $53.00 | $1119.95 | $647.23 | $98.13 | $99.62 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 1 | 28 | 35 | 36 | 33 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.7% | +0.1% | +0.1% | +2.4% | +2.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 10 | 1 | 7 | 30 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.92 | $1.00 | $0.40 | $2.24 | $2.72 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.2% | +0.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
EMA leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Risk & Volatility). GEV leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). 1 tied.
EMA vs GEV vs PWR vs NEE vs SO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is EMA or GEV or PWR or NEE or SO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Quanta Services, Inc.
(PWR) is the stronger pick with 19. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 8. 9% for GE Vernova Inc. (GEV). Emera Incorporated (EMA) offers the better valuation at 21. 1x trailing P/E (19. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate GE Vernova Inc. (GEV) a "Buy" — based on 28 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 — EMA or GEV or PWR or NEE or SO?
On trailing P/E, Emera Incorporated (EMA) is the cheapest at 21.
1x versus Quanta Services, Inc. at 110. 4x. On forward P/E, Emera Incorporated is actually cheaper at 19. 6x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: NextEra Energy, Inc. wins at 1. 33x versus The Southern Company's 3. 45x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — EMA or GEV or PWR or NEE or SO?
Over the past 5 years, GE Vernova Inc.
(GEV) delivered a total return of +698. 3%, compared to +36. 4% for Emera Incorporated (EMA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PWR returned +31. 4% versus EMA's +102. 1%. 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 — EMA or GEV or PWR or NEE or SO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Emera Incorporated (EMA) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
25β versus GE Vernova Inc. 's 1. 76β — meaning GEV is approximately -808% more volatile than EMA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Quanta Services, Inc. (PWR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 13% versus 169% for The Southern Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — EMA or GEV or PWR or NEE or SO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Quanta Services, Inc.
(PWR) is pulling ahead at 19. 8% versus 8. 9% for GE Vernova Inc. (GEV). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: GE Vernova Inc. grew EPS 217. 0% year-over-year, compared to -2. 4% for NextEra Energy, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, PWR leads at 18. 4% 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 — EMA or GEV or PWR or NEE or SO?
NextEra Energy, Inc.
(NEE) is the more profitable company, earning 24. 9% net margin versus 3. 6% for Quanta Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 24. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NEE leads at 30. 1% versus 3. 6% for GEV. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NEE leads at 62. 8%, 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.
07Is EMA or GEV or PWR or NEE or SO more undervalued right now?
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, NextEra Energy, Inc. (NEE) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 33x versus The Southern Company's 3. 45x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Emera Incorporated (EMA) trades at 19. 6x forward P/E versus 57. 4x for Quanta Services, Inc. — 37. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for SO: 7. 8% to $99. 62.
08Which pays a better dividend — EMA or GEV or PWR or NEE or SO?
In this comparison, SO (2.
9% yield), EMA (2. 7% yield), NEE (2. 4% yield) pay a dividend. GEV, PWR do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is EMA or GEV or PWR or NEE or SO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Emera Incorporated (EMA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
25), 2. 7% yield, +102. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (EMA: +102. 1%, PWR: +31. 4%), 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.
10What are the main differences between EMA and GEV and PWR and NEE and SO?
These companies operate in different sectors (EMA (Utilities) and GEV (Utilities) and PWR (Industrials) and NEE (Utilities) and SO (Utilities)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: EMA is a mid-cap high-growth stock; GEV is a large-cap quality compounder stock; PWR is a mid-cap high-growth stock; NEE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; SO is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. EMA, NEE, SO pay a dividend while GEV, PWR 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.
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.