Compare Stocks

5 / 10
Try these comparisons:

Stock Comparison

FTS vs ATO vs SR vs CMS vs NI

Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.

Live fundamentals10-year financials5-year price chart
FTS
Fortis Inc.

Regulated Electric

UtilitiesNYSE • CA
Market Cap$28.47B
5Y Perf.+46.3%
ATO
Atmos Energy Corporation

Regulated Gas

UtilitiesNYSE • US
Market Cap$30.09B
5Y Perf.+76.9%
SR
Spire Inc.

Regulated Gas

UtilitiesNYSE • US
Market Cap$5.05B
5Y Perf.+17.3%
CMS
CMS Energy Corporation

Regulated Electric

UtilitiesNYSE • US
Market Cap$22.85B
5Y Perf.+26.3%
NI
NiSource Inc.

Regulated Gas

UtilitiesNYSE • US
Market Cap$22.54B
5Y Perf.+97.3%

FTS vs ATO vs SR vs CMS vs NI — Key Financials

Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.

Company Snapshot
FTS logoFTS
ATO logoATO
SR logoSR
CMS logoCMS
NI logoNI
IndustryRegulated ElectricRegulated GasRegulated GasRegulated ElectricRegulated Gas
Market Cap$28.47B$30.09B$5.05B$22.85B$22.54B
Revenue (TTM)$12.22B$4.88B$2.47B$8.82B$6.82B
Net Income (TTM)$1.80B$1.35B$358M$1.11B$962M
Gross Margin60.8%32.9%73.3%64.6%62.8%
Operating Margin28.4%35.9%22.1%19.5%27.8%
Forward P/E15.2x21.9x16.5x19.0x22.9x
Total Debt$34.63B$9.30B$5.24B$18.94B$16.24B
Cash & Equiv.$367M$204M$6M$615M$136M

FTS vs ATO vs SR vs CMS vs NILong-Term Stock Performance

Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.

FTS
ATO
SR
CMS
NI
StockMay 20May 26Return
Fortis Inc. (FTS)100146.3+46.3%
Atmos Energy Corpor… (ATO)100176.9+76.9%
Spire Inc. (SR)100117.3+17.3%
CMS Energy Corporat… (CMS)100126.3+26.3%
NiSource Inc. (NI)100197.3+97.3%

Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.

Quick Verdict: FTS vs ATO vs SR vs CMS vs NI

Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.

Bottom line: ATO leads in 3 of 7 categories (5-stock set), making it the strongest pick for profitability and margin quality and dividend income and shareholder returns. NiSource Inc. is the stronger pick specifically for growth and revenue expansion and recent price momentum and sentiment. FTS and CMS also each lead in at least one category. As sector peers, any of these can serve as alternatives in the same allocation.
FTS
Fortis Inc.
The Value Play

FTS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for value.

  • Lower P/E (15.2x vs 22.9x)
Best for: value
ATO
Atmos Energy Corporation
The Long-Run Compounder

ATO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding.

  • 179.6% 10Y total return vs NI's 137.6%
  • 27.6% margin vs CMS's 12.5%
  • 1.9% yield, 28-year raise streak, vs SR's 3.6%
  • 4.5% ROA vs FTS's 2.4%, ROIC 5.5% vs 4.4%
Best for: long-term compounding
SR
Spire Inc.
The Value Pick

SR is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.

  • PEG 0.66 vs CMS's 3.18
Best for: valuation efficiency
CMS
CMS Energy Corporation
The Income Pick

CMS is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.

  • Dividend streak 19 yrs, beta 0.01, yield 3.0%
  • Lower volatility, beta 0.01, current ratio 0.98x
  • Beta 0.01, yield 3.0%, current ratio 0.98x
  • Beta 0.01 vs NI's 0.22
Best for: income & stability and sleep-well-at-night
NI
NiSource Inc.
The Growth Play

NI is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.

  • Rev growth 21.8%, EPS growth 20.4%, 3Y rev CAGR 4.3%
  • 21.8% revenue growth vs SR's -4.5%
  • +19.0% vs CMS's +3.0%
Best for: growth exposure
See the full category breakdown
CategoryWinnerWhy
GrowthNI logoNI21.8% revenue growth vs SR's -4.5%
ValueFTS logoFTSLower P/E (15.2x vs 22.9x)
Quality / MarginsATO logoATO27.6% margin vs CMS's 12.5%
Stability / SafetyCMS logoCMSBeta 0.01 vs NI's 0.22
DividendsATO logoATO1.9% yield, 28-year raise streak, vs SR's 3.6%
Momentum (1Y)NI logoNI+19.0% vs CMS's +3.0%
Efficiency (ROA)ATO logoATO4.5% ROA vs FTS's 2.4%, ROIC 5.5% vs 4.4%

FTS vs ATO vs SR vs CMS vs NI — Revenue Breakdown by Segment

How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units

FTSFortis Inc.
FY 2025
Electric and Gas
97.3%$11.6B
Other Services
2.7%$316M
ATOAtmos Energy Corporation
FY 2025
Distribution Segment
79.6%$4.4B
Pipeline and Storage Segment
20.4%$1.1B
SRSpire Inc.
FY 2025
Gas Utility
87.6%$2.2B
Gas Marketing
6.2%$157M
Midstream
6.2%$156M
CMSCMS Energy Corporation
FY 2025
Residential Utility Services
57.3%$4.4B
Commercial Utility Service
31.9%$2.4B
Industrial Utility Service
10.8%$824M
NINiSource Inc.
FY 2023
Gas Distribution Operations
67.6%$3.7B
Electric Operations
32.4%$1.8B

FTS vs ATO vs SR vs CMS vs NI — Financial Metrics

Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.

BEST OVERALLATOLAGGINGCMS

Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)

Evenly matched — ATO and SR each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.

FTS is the larger business by revenue, generating $12.2B annually — 4.9x SR's $2.5B. ATO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CMS's 12.5%. On growth, CMS holds the edge at +11.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.

MetricFTS logoFTSFortis Inc.ATO logoATOAtmos Energy Corp…SR logoSRSpire Inc.CMS logoCMSCMS Energy Corpor…NI logoNINiSource Inc.
RevenueTrailing 12 months$12.2B$4.9B$2.5B$8.8B$6.8B
EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax$5.5B$2.5B$864M$2.9B$3.1B
Net IncomeAfter-tax profit$1.8B$1.3B$358M$1.1B$962M
Free Cash FlowCash after capex-$2.2B-$2.0B-$2.7B-$2.0B-$1.0B
Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue+60.8%+32.9%+73.3%+64.6%+62.8%
Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue+28.4%+35.9%+22.1%+19.5%+27.8%
Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue+14.8%+27.6%+14.5%+12.5%+14.1%
FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue-18.4%-40.8%-108.1%-23.1%-15.0%
Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year+1.6%+0.6%-9.0%+11.6%+8.2%
EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year-1.0%+14.5%+31.1%+11.9%+6.0%
Evenly matched — ATO and SR each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.

Valuation Metrics

SR leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.

At 19.6x trailing earnings, SR trades at a 20% valuation discount to ATO's 24.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), SR offers better value at 0.79x vs FTS's 4.48x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.

MetricFTS logoFTSFortis Inc.ATO logoATOAtmos Energy Corp…SR logoSRSpire Inc.CMS logoCMSCMS Energy Corpor…NI logoNINiSource Inc.
Market CapShares × price$28.5B$30.1B$5.1B$22.8B$22.5B
Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash$53.6B$39.2B$10.3B$41.2B$38.6B
Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS22.52x24.38x19.57x20.95x24.11x
Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est.15.19x21.88x16.47x19.05x22.85x
PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate4.48x2.77x0.79x3.50x
EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple13.18x17.08x12.51x14.31x12.87x
Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue3.19x6.40x2.04x2.68x3.39x
Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share1.57x2.15x1.48x2.29x1.91x
Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF
SR leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.

Profitability & Efficiency

ATO leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.

CMS delivers a 11.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $12 in annual profit, vs $7 for FTS. ATO carries lower financial leverage with a 0.69x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CMS's 1.95x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NI scores 7/9 vs SR's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.

MetricFTS logoFTSFortis Inc.ATO logoATOAtmos Energy Corp…SR logoSRSpire Inc.CMS logoCMSCMS Energy Corpor…NI logoNINiSource Inc.
ROE (TTM)Return on equity+6.9%+7.7%+10.4%+11.6%+8.4%
ROA (TTM)Return on assets+2.4%+4.5%+2.9%+2.8%+2.7%
ROICReturn on invested capital+4.4%+5.5%+4.7%+4.9%+5.3%
ROCEReturn on capital employed+5.2%+6.1%+5.8%+5.0%+6.0%
Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–965567
Debt / EquityFinancial leverage1.34x0.69x1.54x1.95x1.39x
Net DebtTotal debt minus cash$34.3B$9.1B$5.2B$18.3B$16.1B
Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets$367M$204M$6M$615M$136M
Total DebtShort + long-term debt$34.6B$9.3B$5.2B$18.9B$16.2B
Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense2.59x9.61x2.62x2.58x2.87x
ATO leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.

Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)

NI leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.

A $10,000 investment in NI five years ago would be worth $20,085 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $13,036 for CMS. Over the past 12 months, NI leads with a +19.0% total return vs CMS's +3.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NI at 20.9% vs CMS's 9.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.

MetricFTS logoFTSFortis Inc.ATO logoATOAtmos Energy Corp…SR logoSRSpire Inc.CMS logoCMSCMS Energy Corpor…NI logoNINiSource Inc.
YTD ReturnYear-to-date+9.0%+8.0%+3.8%+5.8%+13.0%
1-Year ReturnPast 12 months+16.4%+14.1%+16.6%+3.0%+19.0%
3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+33.9%+62.9%+38.7%+30.3%+76.8%
5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+42.7%+91.7%+32.1%+30.4%+100.8%
10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+130.8%+179.6%+71.4%+119.4%+137.6%
CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return+10.2%+17.7%+11.5%+9.2%+20.9%
NI leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.

Risk & Volatility

Evenly matched — FTS and NI each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

FTS is the less volatile stock with a -0.26 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NI's 0.22 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. NI currently trades 96.0% from its 52-week high vs SR's 89.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.

MetricFTS logoFTSFortis Inc.ATO logoATOAtmos Energy Corp…SR logoSRSpire Inc.CMS logoCMSCMS Energy Corpor…NI logoNINiSource Inc.
Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500-0.26x-0.00x0.06x0.01x0.22x
52-Week HighHighest price in past year$58.78$192.51$95.31$80.36$48.98
52-Week LowLowest price in past year$45.87$149.98$69.94$67.71$37.22
% of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak+95.5%+94.5%+89.7%+92.0%+96.0%
RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–10045.846.034.038.248.8
Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded669K854K346K2.6M3.9M
Evenly matched — FTS and NI each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst Outlook

Evenly matched — ATO and SR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst consensus: FTS as "Hold", ATO as "Hold", SR as "Buy", CMS as "Buy", NI as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 13.4% upside for SR (target: $97) vs -1.6% for ATO (target: $179). For income investors, SR offers the higher dividend yield at 3.63% vs ATO's 1.90%.

MetricFTS logoFTSFortis Inc.ATO logoATOAtmos Energy Corp…SR logoSRSpire Inc.CMS logoCMSCMS Energy Corpor…NI logoNINiSource Inc.
Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sellHoldHoldBuyBuyBuy
Price TargetConsensus 12-month target$62.00$179.00$97.00$81.00$49.80
# AnalystsCovering analysts1220152922
Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price+1.9%+1.9%+3.6%+3.0%+2.4%
Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises02812194
Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS$1.49$3.45$3.10$2.21$1.12
Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Evenly matched — ATO and SR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Key Takeaway

SR leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). ATO leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.

Best OverallAtmos Energy Corporation (ATO)Leads 1 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...

FTS vs ATO vs SR vs CMS vs NI: Key Questions Answered

10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily

01

Is FTS or ATO or SR or CMS or NI a better buy right now?

For growth investors, NiSource Inc.

(NI) is the stronger pick with 21. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -4. 5% for Spire Inc. (SR). Spire Inc. (SR) offers the better valuation at 19. 6x trailing P/E (16. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Spire Inc. (SR) a "Buy" — based on 15 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.

02

Which has the better valuation — FTS or ATO or SR or CMS or NI?

On trailing P/E, Spire Inc.

(SR) is the cheapest at 19. 6x versus Atmos Energy Corporation at 24. 4x. On forward P/E, Fortis Inc. is actually cheaper at 15. 2x — 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: Spire Inc. wins at 0. 66x versus CMS Energy Corporation's 3. 18x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

03

Which is the better long-term investment — FTS or ATO or SR or CMS or NI?

Over the past 5 years, NiSource Inc.

(NI) delivered a total return of +100. 8%, compared to +30. 4% for CMS Energy Corporation (CMS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ATO returned +179. 6% versus SR's +71. 4%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

04

Which is safer — FTS or ATO or SR or CMS or NI?

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Fortis Inc.

(FTS) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 26β versus NiSource Inc. 's 0. 22β — meaning NI is approximately -185% more volatile than FTS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Atmos Energy Corporation (ATO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 69% versus 195% for CMS Energy Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

05

Which is growing faster — FTS or ATO or SR or CMS or NI?

By revenue growth (latest reported year), NiSource Inc.

(NI) is pulling ahead at 21. 8% versus -4. 5% for Spire Inc. (SR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: NiSource Inc. grew EPS 20. 4% year-over-year, compared to 4. 3% for Spire Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, NI leads at 4. 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.

06

Which has better profit margins — FTS or ATO or SR or CMS or NI?

Atmos Energy Corporation (ATO) is the more profitable company, earning 25.

5% net margin versus 11. 0% for Spire Inc. — meaning it keeps 25. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ATO leads at 33. 2% versus 20. 2% for CMS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SR leads at 78. 1%, 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.

07

Is FTS or ATO or SR or CMS or NI 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, Spire Inc. (SR) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 66x versus CMS Energy Corporation's 3. 18x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Fortis Inc. (FTS) trades at 15. 2x forward P/E versus 22. 9x for NiSource Inc. — 7. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for SR: 13. 4% to $97. 00.

08

Which pays a better dividend — FTS or ATO or SR or CMS or NI?

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Spire Inc. (SR) offers the highest yield at 3. 6%, versus 1. 9% for Atmos Energy Corporation (ATO).

09

Is FTS or ATO or SR or CMS or NI better for a retirement portfolio?

For long-horizon retirement investors, Fortis Inc.

(FTS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 26), 1. 9% yield, +130. 8% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FTS: +130. 8%, NI: +137. 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.

10

What are the main differences between FTS and ATO and SR and CMS and NI?

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: FTS is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; ATO is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; SR is a small-cap income-oriented stock; CMS is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; NI is a mid-cap high-growth 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 all of them.

Stocks Like

FTS

Income & Dividend Stock

  • Sector: Utilities
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Net Margin > 8%
  • Dividend Yield > 0.7%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

ATO

Dividend Mega-Cap Quality

  • Sector: Utilities
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Net Margin > 16%
  • Dividend Yield > 0.7%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

SR

Income & Dividend Stock

  • Sector: Utilities
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Net Margin > 8%
  • Dividend Yield > 1.4%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

CMS

Income & Dividend Stock

  • Sector: Utilities
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 5%
  • Net Margin > 7%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

NI

Income & Dividend Stock

  • Sector: Utilities
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 5%
  • Net Margin > 8%
Run This Screen
Custom Screen

Beat Both

Find stocks that outperform FTS and ATO and SR and CMS and NI on the metrics below

Revenue Growth>
%
(FTS: 1.6% · ATO: 0.6%)
Net Margin>
%
(FTS: 14.8% · ATO: 27.6%)
P/E Ratio<
x
(FTS: 22.5x · ATO: 24.4x)

You Might Also Compare

Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.