FANG vs SM vs MTDR vs DVN vs COP

For growth investors, Diamondback Energy, Inc.

(FANG) is the stronger pick with 36. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 1% for Matador Resources Company (MTDR). SM Energy Company (SM) offers the better valuation at 5. 2x trailing P/E (4. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Diamondback Energy, Inc. (FANG) a "Buy" — based on 51 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, SM Energy Company (SM) is the cheapest at 5.

2x versus Diamondback Energy, Inc. at 33. 2x. On forward P/E, SM Energy Company is actually cheaper at 4. 4x.

Over the past 5 years, Diamondback Energy, Inc.

(FANG) delivered a total return of +163. 7%, compared to +78. 9% for SM Energy Company (SM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: COP returned +233. 4% versus DVN's +99. 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), Devon Energy Corporation (DVN) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

05β versus SM Energy Company's 0. 16β — meaning SM is approximately 213% more volatile than DVN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Diamondback Energy, Inc. (FANG) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 34% versus 59% for Matador Resources Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Diamondback Energy, Inc.

(FANG) is pulling ahead at 36. 3% versus 5. 1% for Matador Resources Company (MTDR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Devon Energy Corporation grew EPS -8. 1% year-over-year, compared to -63. 1% for Diamondback Energy, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, FANG leads at 16. 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.

Matador Resources Company (MTDR) is the more profitable company, earning 20.

8% net margin versus 11. 1% for Diamondback Energy, Inc. — meaning it keeps 20. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FANG leads at 32. 7% versus 19. 6% for COP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MTDR leads at 43. 7%, 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, SM Energy Company (SM) trades at 4.

4x forward P/E versus 13. 3x for ConocoPhillips — 8. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MTDR: 22. 9% to $68. 29.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

ConocoPhillips (COP) offers the highest yield at 2. 8%, versus 2. 1% for Diamondback Energy, Inc. (FANG).

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

08), 2. 8% yield, +233. 4% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (COP: +233. 4%, SM: +132. 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.

In terms of investment character: FANG is a mid-cap high-growth stock; SM is a small-cap high-growth stock; MTDR is a small-cap deep-value stock; DVN is a mid-cap deep-value stock; COP is a mid-cap quality compounder 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.