Regulated Electric
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
EMA vs PNW
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Regulated Electric
EMA vs PNW — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Regulated Electric | Regulated Electric |
| Market Cap | $15.75B | $12.06B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $8.79B | $5.46B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $1.09B | $654M |
| Gross Margin | 39.1% | 40.7% |
| Operating Margin | 21.8% | 27.5% |
| Forward P/E | 19.6x | 21.1x |
| Total Debt | $21.62B | $17.85B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $365M | $7M |
EMA vs PNW — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Emera Incorporated (EMA) | 100 | 132.1 | +32.1% |
| Pinnacle West Capit… (PNW) | 100 | 127.8 | +27.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: EMA vs PNW
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
EMA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 15.3%, EPS growth 97.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 3.0%
- 102.1% 10Y total return vs PNW's 78.9%
- Lower volatility, beta -0.25, current ratio 0.66x
PNW is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta -0.03, yield 3.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 15.3% revenue growth vs PNW's 4.2% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (19.6x vs 21.1x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 12.4% margin vs PNW's 12.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Lower D/E ratio (161.5% vs 251.8%) | |
| Dividends | 2.7% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs PNW's 3.5% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +21.9% vs PNW's +10.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 2.4% ROA vs PNW's 2.2%, ROIC 3.5% vs 3.9% |
EMA vs PNW — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
EMA vs PNW — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PNW leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
EMA is the larger business by revenue, generating $8.8B annually — 1.6x PNW's $5.5B. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 12.4% (EMA) to 12.0% (PNW). On growth, EMA holds the edge at +14.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $8.8B | $5.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $3.2B | $2.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $1.1B | $654M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$1.7B | -$992M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +39.1% | +40.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +21.8% | +27.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +12.4% | +12.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -19.7% | -18.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +14.4% | +11.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -57.7% | +7.8% |
Valuation Metrics
PNW leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 19.7x trailing earnings, PNW trades at a 6% valuation discount to EMA's 21.1x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, PNW's 14.3x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than EMA's 15.0x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $15.7B | $12.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $31.3B | $29.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 21.07x | 19.71x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 19.56x | 21.11x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 28.97x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 14.99x | 14.32x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.59x | 2.26x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.59x | 1.71x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
PNW leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
PNW delivers a 9.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $9 in annual profit, vs $8 for EMA. EMA carries lower financial leverage with a 1.62x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PNW's 2.52x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), EMA scores 5/9 vs PNW's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +8.1% | +9.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +2.4% | +2.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +3.5% | +3.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +4.1% | +4.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 3 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.62x | 2.52x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $21.3B | $17.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $365M | $7M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $21.6B | $17.8B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.50x | 2.75x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — EMA and PNW each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in EMA five years ago would be worth $13,643 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $13,591 for PNW. Over the past 12 months, EMA leads with a +21.9% total return vs PNW's +10.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors PNW at 11.4% vs EMA's 10.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +8.2% | +15.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +21.9% | +10.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +34.0% | +38.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +36.4% | +35.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +102.1% | +78.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +10.2% | +11.4% |
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 PNW's -0.03 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.25x | -0.03x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $54.06 | $104.92 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $41.90 | $85.32 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +96.5% | +94.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 48.3 | 43.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 251K | 1.1M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — EMA and PNW each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates EMA as "Hold" and PNW as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 3.6% upside for PNW (target: $103) vs 1.6% for EMA (target: $53). For income investors, PNW offers the higher dividend yield at 3.48% vs EMA's 2.70%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $53.00 | $103.11 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 1 | 24 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.7% | +3.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 10 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.92 | $3.47 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% |
PNW leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). EMA leads in 1 (Risk & Volatility). 2 tied.
EMA vs PNW: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is EMA or PNW a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Emera Incorporated (EMA) is the stronger pick with 15.
3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 4. 2% for Pinnacle West Capital Corporation (PNW). Pinnacle West Capital Corporation (PNW) offers the better valuation at 19. 7x trailing P/E (21. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Emera Incorporated (EMA) a "Hold" — based on 1 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 PNW?
On trailing P/E, Pinnacle West Capital Corporation (PNW) is the cheapest at 19.
7x versus Emera Incorporated at 21. 1x. On forward P/E, Emera Incorporated is actually cheaper at 19. 6x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — EMA or PNW?
Over the past 5 years, Emera Incorporated (EMA) delivered a total return of +36.
4%, compared to +35. 9% for Pinnacle West Capital Corporation (PNW). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: EMA returned +102. 1% versus PNW's +78. 9%. 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 PNW?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Emera Incorporated (EMA) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
25β versus Pinnacle West Capital Corporation's -0. 03β — meaning PNW is approximately -89% more volatile than EMA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Emera Incorporated (EMA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 162% versus 3% for Pinnacle West Capital Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — EMA or PNW?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Emera Incorporated (EMA) is pulling ahead at 15.
3% versus 4. 2% for Pinnacle West Capital Corporation (PNW). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Emera Incorporated grew EPS 97. 7% year-over-year, compared to -3. 6% for Pinnacle West Capital Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, PNW leads at 7. 3% 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 PNW?
Emera Incorporated (EMA) is the more profitable company, earning 13.
1% net margin versus 11. 5% for Pinnacle West Capital Corporation — meaning it keeps 13. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: PNW leads at 20. 9% versus 18. 7% for EMA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — PNW leads at 25. 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.
07Is EMA or PNW more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Emera Incorporated (EMA) trades at 19.
6x forward P/E versus 21. 1x for Pinnacle West Capital Corporation — 1. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PNW: 3. 6% to $103. 11.
08Which pays a better dividend — EMA or PNW?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Pinnacle West Capital Corporation (PNW) offers the highest yield at 3. 5%, versus 2. 7% for Emera Incorporated (EMA).
09Is EMA or PNW 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%, PNW: +78. 9%), 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 PNW?
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: EMA is a mid-cap high-growth stock; PNW is a mid-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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.