Regulated Electric
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
FTS vs ATO vs WEC vs ES vs CMS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Regulated Gas
Regulated Electric
Regulated Electric
Regulated Electric
FTS vs ATO vs WEC vs ES vs CMS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Regulated Electric | Regulated Gas | Regulated Electric | Regulated Electric | Regulated Electric |
| Market Cap | $28.48B | $30.53B | $37.11B | $25.75B | $22.88B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $12.17B | $4.88B | $10.08B | $13.55B | $8.82B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $1.80B | $1.35B | $1.64B | $1.69B | $1.11B |
| Gross Margin | 72.3% | 32.9% | 55.7% | 47.8% | 64.6% |
| Operating Margin | 28.7% | 35.9% | 24.0% | 22.1% | 19.5% |
| Forward P/E | 15.2x | 22.2x | 20.4x | 14.5x | 19.1x |
| Total Debt | $34.63B | $9.30B | $22.31B | $30.28B | $18.94B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $367M | $204M | $28M | $135M | $615M |
FTS vs ATO vs WEC vs ES vs CMS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fortis Inc. (FTS) | 100 | 146.3 | +46.3% |
| Atmos Energy Corpor… (ATO) | 100 | 179.5 | +79.5% |
| WEC Energy Group, I… (WEC) | 100 | 124.2 | +24.2% |
| Eversource Energy (ES) | 100 | 81.9 | -18.1% |
| CMS Energy Corporat… (CMS) | 100 | 126.4 | +26.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FTS vs ATO vs WEC vs ES vs CMS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, FTS doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
ATO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 185.9% 10Y total return vs WEC's 138.3%
- PEG 2.52 vs WEC's 4.10
- PEG 2.52 vs 3.19
- 27.6% margin vs ES's 12.5%
WEC is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth is your priority.
- 14.0% revenue growth vs FTS's 5.8%
ES ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 24 yrs, beta 0.27, yield 4.3%
- Rev growth 13.8%, EPS growth 100.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 3.3%
- +20.9% vs CMS's +3.9%
CMS is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.01, current ratio 0.98x
- Beta 0.01, yield 3.0%, current ratio 0.98x
- Beta 0.01 vs ES's 0.27
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 14.0% revenue growth vs FTS's 5.8% | |
| Value | PEG 2.52 vs 3.19 | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.6% margin vs ES's 12.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.01 vs ES's 0.27 | |
| Dividends | 1.9% yield, 28-year raise streak, vs ES's 4.3% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +20.9% vs CMS's +3.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 4.5% ROA vs FTS's 2.4%, ROIC 5.5% vs 4.4% |
FTS vs ATO vs WEC vs ES vs CMS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
FTS vs ATO vs WEC vs ES vs CMS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ES leads in 2 of 6 categories
ATO leads 2 • FTS leads 0 • WEC leads 0 • CMS leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ES leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ES is the larger business by revenue, generating $13.5B annually — 2.8x ATO's $4.9B. ATO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ES's 12.5%. On growth, ES holds the edge at +13.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $12.2B | $4.9B | $10.1B | $13.5B | $8.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $5.5B | $2.5B | $3.9B | $5.4B | $2.9B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $1.8B | $1.3B | $1.6B | $1.7B | $1.1B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$2.2B | -$2.0B | -$1.1B | -$45M | -$2.0B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +72.3% | +32.9% | +55.7% | +47.8% | +64.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +28.7% | +35.9% | +24.0% | +22.1% | +19.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +14.8% | +27.6% | +16.2% | +12.5% | +12.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -17.8% | -40.8% | -11.0% | -0.3% | -23.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +4.4% | +0.6% | +9.0% | +13.4% | +11.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +3.8% | +14.5% | +7.9% | +4.6% | +11.9% |
Valuation Metrics
ES leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.0x trailing earnings, ES trades at a 39% valuation discount to ATO's 24.7x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ATO offers better value at 2.81x vs WEC's 4.75x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $28.5B | $30.5B | $37.1B | $25.8B | $22.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $53.7B | $39.6B | $59.4B | $55.9B | $41.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 22.43x | 24.73x | 23.59x | 15.03x | 20.98x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 15.20x | 22.20x | 20.36x | 14.54x | 19.07x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 4.46x | 2.81x | 4.75x | 2.93x | 3.51x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 13.15x | 17.27x | 15.41x | 10.36x | 14.32x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 3.18x | 6.49x | 3.79x | 1.90x | 2.68x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.56x | 2.19x | 2.66x | 1.56x | 2.29x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
ATO leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
WEC 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), FTS scores 6/9 vs WEC's 5/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +6.9% | +7.7% | +11.6% | +10.6% | +11.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +2.4% | +4.5% | +3.3% | +2.7% | +2.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +4.4% | +5.5% | +5.1% | +4.9% | +4.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +5.2% | +6.1% | +5.4% | +5.5% | +5.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.34x | 0.69x | 1.59x | 1.85x | 1.95x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $34.3B | $9.1B | $22.3B | $30.1B | $18.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $367M | $204M | $28M | $135M | $615M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $34.6B | $9.3B | $22.3B | $30.3B | $18.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 2.59x | 9.61x | 2.87x | 2.40x | 2.58x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
ATO leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ATO five years ago would be worth $19,366 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $9,752 for ES. Over the past 12 months, ES leads with a +20.9% total return vs CMS's +3.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ATO at 18.2% vs ES's 0.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +9.1% | +9.5% | +7.9% | +1.8% | +6.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +18.1% | +16.2% | +7.1% | +20.9% | +3.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +34.0% | +65.2% | +30.6% | +0.6% | +30.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +43.2% | +93.7% | +32.6% | -2.5% | +30.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +125.9% | +185.9% | +138.3% | +61.8% | +121.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +10.2% | +18.2% | +9.3% | +0.2% | +9.3% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — FTS and ATO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FTS is the less volatile stock with a -0.26 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ES's 0.27 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ATO currently trades 95.8% from its 52-week high vs ES's 89.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.26x | -0.00x | -0.03x | 0.27x | 0.01x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $58.78 | $192.51 | $119.62 | $76.41 | $80.36 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $45.87 | $149.98 | $100.61 | $58.92 | $67.71 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +95.5% | +95.8% | +95.3% | +89.7% | +92.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 58.2 | 52.0 | 48.5 | 47.5 | 41.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 675K | 833K | 1.8M | 2.1M | 2.6M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — ATO and ES each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: FTS as "Hold", ATO as "Hold", WEC as "Hold", ES as "Hold", CMS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 10.5% upside for FTS (target: $62) vs -3.0% for ATO (target: $179). For income investors, ES offers the higher dividend yield at 4.30% vs ATO's 1.87%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $62.00 | $179.00 | $122.78 | $74.00 | $81.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 12 | 20 | 34 | 29 | 29 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.0% | +1.9% | +3.1% | +4.3% | +3.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 28 | 23 | 24 | 19 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.49 | $3.45 | $3.50 | $2.94 | $2.21 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
ES leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). ATO leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). 2 tied.
FTS vs ATO vs WEC vs ES vs CMS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FTS or ATO or WEC or ES or CMS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, WEC Energy Group, Inc.
(WEC) is the stronger pick with 14. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 8% for Fortis Inc. (FTS). Eversource Energy (ES) offers the better valuation at 15. 0x trailing P/E (14. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate CMS Energy Corporation (CMS) a "Buy" — based on 29 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 — FTS or ATO or WEC or ES or CMS?
On trailing P/E, Eversource Energy (ES) is the cheapest at 15.
0x versus Atmos Energy Corporation at 24. 7x. On forward P/E, Eversource Energy is actually cheaper at 14. 5x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Atmos Energy Corporation wins at 2. 52x versus WEC Energy Group, Inc. 's 4. 10x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — FTS or ATO or WEC or ES or CMS?
Over the past 5 years, Atmos Energy Corporation (ATO) delivered a total return of +93.
7%, compared to -2. 5% for Eversource Energy (ES). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ATO returned +185. 9% versus ES's +61. 8%. 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 — FTS or ATO or WEC or ES or CMS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Fortis Inc.
(FTS) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 26β versus Eversource Energy's 0. 27β — meaning ES is approximately -204% 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.
05Which is growing faster — FTS or ATO or WEC or ES or CMS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), WEC Energy Group, Inc.
(WEC) is pulling ahead at 14. 0% versus 5. 8% for Fortis Inc. (FTS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Eversource Energy grew EPS 100. 9% year-over-year, compared to 0. 0% for WEC Energy Group, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ATO leads at 3. 8% 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 — FTS or ATO or WEC or ES or CMS?
Atmos Energy Corporation (ATO) is the more profitable company, earning 25.
5% net margin versus 12. 5% for Eversource Energy — 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 — FTS leads at 72. 3%, 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 FTS or ATO or WEC or ES or CMS 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, Atmos Energy Corporation (ATO) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 2. 52x versus WEC Energy Group, Inc. 's 4. 10x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Eversource Energy (ES) trades at 14. 5x forward P/E versus 22. 2x for Atmos Energy Corporation — 7. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FTS: 10. 5% to $62. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — FTS or ATO or WEC or ES or CMS?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Eversource Energy (ES) offers the highest yield at 4. 3%, versus 1. 9% for Atmos Energy Corporation (ATO).
09Is FTS or ATO or WEC or ES or CMS 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), 2. 0% yield, +125. 9% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FTS: +125. 9%, ES: +61. 8%), 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 FTS and ATO and WEC and ES and CMS?
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; WEC is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; ES is a mid-cap deep-value stock; CMS 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.
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.