MDU vs NWE vs NI vs AVA

For growth investors, NiSource Inc.

(NI) is the stronger pick with 21. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 3% for Avista Corporation (AVA). Avista Corporation (AVA) offers the better valuation at 17. 2x trailing P/E (16. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate MDU Resources Group, Inc. (MDU) a "Buy" — based on 17 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, Avista Corporation (AVA) is the cheapest at 17.

2x versus Northwestern Energy Group Inc at 24. 6x. On forward P/E, Avista Corporation is actually cheaper at 16. 0x.

Over the past 5 years, NiSource Inc.

(NI) delivered a total return of +100. 8%, compared to +6. 9% for Avista Corporation (AVA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MDU returned +227. 8% versus AVA's +40. 1%. 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), Avista Corporation (AVA) is the lower-risk stock at -0.

00β versus MDU Resources Group, Inc. 's 0. 38β — meaning MDU is approximately -12860% more volatile than AVA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, MDU Resources Group, Inc. (MDU) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 99% versus 139% for NiSource Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

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

(NI) is pulling ahead at 21. 8% versus 1. 3% for Avista Corporation (AVA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: NiSource Inc. grew EPS 20. 4% year-over-year, compared to -32. 1% for MDU Resources Group, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, AVA leads at 4. 7% 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.

NiSource Inc.

(NI) is the more profitable company, earning 14. 0% net margin versus 9. 8% for Avista Corporation — meaning it keeps 14. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NI leads at 27. 6% versus 15. 5% for MDU. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NWE leads at 82. 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.

On forward earnings alone, Avista Corporation (AVA) trades at 16.

0x forward P/E versus 22. 9x for MDU Resources Group, Inc. — 6. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for NI: 5. 9% to $49. 80.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Avista Corporation (AVA) offers the highest yield at 4. 8%, versus 2. 3% for MDU Resources Group, Inc. (MDU).

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

00), 4. 8% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (AVA: +40. 1%, MDU: +227. 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.

These companies operate in different sectors (MDU (Industrials) and NWE (Utilities) and NI (Utilities) and AVA (Utilities)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: MDU is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NWE is a small-cap income-oriented stock; NI is a mid-cap high-growth stock; AVA is a small-cap deep-value 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.