MNTK vs CLNE

For growth investors, Clean Energy Fuels Corp.

(CLNE) is the stronger pick with 2. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 0. 4% for Montauk Renewables, Inc. (MNTK). Montauk Renewables, Inc. (MNTK) offers the better valuation at 116. 4x trailing P/E (13. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Clean Energy Fuels Corp. (CLNE) a "Buy" — based on 22 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.

Over the past 5 years, Clean Energy Fuels Corp.

(CLNE) delivered a total return of -73. 8%, compared to -85. 1% for Montauk Renewables, Inc. (MNTK). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CLNE returned -26. 9% versus MNTK's -87. 9%. 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), Clean Energy Fuels Corp.

(CLNE) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 19β versus Montauk Renewables, Inc. 's 1. 82β — meaning MNTK is approximately 53% more volatile than CLNE relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Clean Energy Fuels Corp. (CLNE) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 18% versus 52% for Montauk Renewables, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Clean Energy Fuels Corp.

(CLNE) is pulling ahead at 2. 2% versus 0. 4% for Montauk Renewables, Inc. (MNTK). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Montauk Renewables, Inc. grew EPS -82. 2% year-over-year, compared to -173. 0% for Clean Energy Fuels Corp.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CLNE leads at 0. 4% 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.

Montauk Renewables, Inc.

(MNTK) is the more profitable company, earning 1. 0% net margin versus -52. 3% for Clean Energy Fuels Corp. — meaning it keeps 1. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MNTK leads at 2. 3% versus -22. 1% for CLNE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MNTK leads at 39. 0%, 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.

Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CLNE: 51.

5% to $3. 50.

None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.

All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Clean Energy Fuels Corp.

(CLNE) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 19)). Montauk Renewables, Inc. (MNTK) carries a higher beta of 1. 82 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CLNE: -26. 9%, MNTK: -87. 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.

These companies operate in different sectors (MNTK (Utilities) and CLNE (Energy)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

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.