Oil & Gas Exploration & Production
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
MXC vs TPVG vs USEG
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Asset Management
Oil & Gas Exploration & Production
MXC vs TPVG vs USEG — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Oil & Gas Exploration & Production | Asset Management | Oil & Gas Exploration & Production |
| Market Cap | $16M | $203M | $36M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $7M | $61M | $7M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $1M | $-12M | $-14M |
| Gross Margin | 35.0% | 72.9% | -21.8% |
| Operating Margin | 21.7% | -35.9% | -200.5% |
| Forward P/E | 9.8x | 5.3x | — |
| Total Debt | $127K | $469M | $3M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $2M | $20M | $429K |
MXC vs TPVG vs USEG — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mexco Energy Corpor… (MXC) | 100 | 241.2 | +141.2% |
| TriplePoint Venture… (TPVG) | 100 | 48.6 | -51.4% |
| U.S. Energy Corp. (USEG) | 100 | 20.3 | -79.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: MXC vs TPVG vs USEG
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
MXC carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 207.8% 10Y total return vs TPVG's 80.0%
- Lower volatility, beta -0.87, Low D/E 0.7%, current ratio 5.48x
- Beta -0.87, yield 1.3%, current ratio 5.48x
TPVG is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.70, yield 20.5%
- Rev growth 36.6%, EPS growth 48.8%
- 36.6% NII/revenue growth vs USEG's -64.3%
USEG plays a supporting role in this comparison — it may shine differently against other peers.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 36.6% NII/revenue growth vs USEG's -64.3% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 18.1% margin vs USEG's -213.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Lower D/E ratio (0.7% vs 132.7%) | |
| Dividends | 1.3% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs TPVG's 20.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | -11.7% vs USEG's -47.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 6.1% ROA vs USEG's -29.9%, ROIC 9.1% vs -35.7% |
MXC vs TPVG vs USEG — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
MXC vs TPVG vs USEG — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MXC leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TPVG is the larger business by revenue, generating $61M annually — 9.0x USEG's $7M. MXC is the more profitable business, keeping 18.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to USEG's -2.1%.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $7M | $61M | $7M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $4M | -$22M | -$10M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $1M | -$12M | -$14M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $4M | -$59M | -$19M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +35.0% | +72.9% | -21.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +21.7% | -35.9% | -2.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +18.1% | -19.5% | -2.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +56.6% | -97.1% | -2.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -26.8% | — | -26.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -90.9% | -2.3% | +16.4% |
Valuation Metrics
TPVG leads this category, winning 2 of 4 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 4.1x trailing earnings, TPVG trades at a 58% valuation discount to MXC's 9.8x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, MXC's 3.3x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than TPVG's 8.6x.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $16M | $203M | $36M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $15M | $652M | $38M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 9.77x | 4.10x | -2.44x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 5.35x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 4.04x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 3.31x | 8.61x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.20x | 2.09x | 4.84x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.89x | 0.57x | 1.47x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 18.97x | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
MXC leads this category, winning 9 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MXC delivers a 6.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $6 in annual profit, vs $-50 for USEG. MXC carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to TPVG's 1.33x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MXC scores 6/9 vs USEG's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +6.5% | -3.4% | -50.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +6.1% | -1.5% | -29.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +9.1% | +7.2% | -35.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +9.7% | +9.4% | -28.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 4 | 2 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.01x | 1.33x | 0.12x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$2M | $449M | $2M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $2M | $20M | $429,000 |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $126,525 | $469M | $3M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 666.44x | -1.02x | -146.81x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
TPVG leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MXC five years ago would be worth $10,479 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,781 for USEG. Over the past 12 months, TPVG leads with a -11.7% total return vs USEG's -47.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors TPVG at -8.7% vs MXC's -12.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -19.6% | -17.8% | +9.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -38.9% | -11.7% | -47.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -31.8% | -24.0% | -29.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +4.8% | -21.7% | -72.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +207.8% | +80.0% | -94.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -12.0% | -8.7% | -10.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MXC and TPVG each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MXC is the less volatile stock with a -0.87 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than TPVG's 0.70 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. TPVG currently trades 66.7% from its 52-week high vs USEG's 43.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.87x | 0.70x | -0.26x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $16.48 | $7.50 | $2.43 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $7.66 | $4.48 | $0.66 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +48.0% | +66.7% | +43.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 40.1 | 32.4 | 58.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 12K | 289K | 6.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — MXC and TPVG each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
For income investors, TPVG offers the higher dividend yield at 20.50% vs MXC's 1.25%.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | — |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $8.95 | — |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 12 | — |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.3% | +20.5% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.10 | $1.02 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +4.3% | 0.0% | +5.3% |
MXC leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). TPVG leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns). 2 tied.
MXC vs TPVG vs USEG: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is MXC or TPVG or USEG a better buy right now?
For growth investors, TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp.
(TPVG) is the stronger pick with 36. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -64. 3% for U. S. Energy Corp. (USEG). TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. (TPVG) offers the better valuation at 4. 1x trailing P/E (5. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. (TPVG) a "Hold" — based on 12 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 — MXC or TPVG or USEG?
On trailing P/E, TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp.
(TPVG) is the cheapest at 4. 1x versus Mexco Energy Corporation at 9. 8x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — MXC or TPVG or USEG?
Over the past 5 years, Mexco Energy Corporation (MXC) delivered a total return of +4.
8%, compared to -72. 2% for U. S. Energy Corp. (USEG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MXC returned +207. 8% versus USEG's -94. 6%. 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 — MXC or TPVG or USEG?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Mexco Energy Corporation (MXC) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
87β versus TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. 's 0. 70β — meaning TPVG is approximately -180% more volatile than MXC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Mexco Energy Corporation (MXC) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 133% for TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — MXC or TPVG or USEG?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp.
(TPVG) is pulling ahead at 36. 6% versus -64. 3% for U. S. Energy Corp. (USEG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: U. S. Energy Corp. grew EPS 55. 2% year-over-year, compared to 30. 6% for Mexco Energy Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, MXC 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 — MXC or TPVG or USEG?
TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp.
(TPVG) is the more profitable company, earning 50. 6% net margin versus -195. 5% for U. S. Energy Corp. — meaning it keeps 50. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TPVG leads at 77. 9% versus -140. 4% for USEG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — TPVG leads at 83. 5%, 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.
07Which pays a better dividend — MXC or TPVG or USEG?
In this comparison, TPVG (20.
5% yield), MXC (1. 3% yield) pay a dividend. USEG does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
08Is MXC or TPVG or USEG better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Mexco Energy Corporation (MXC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
87), 1. 3% yield, +207. 8% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MXC: +207. 8%, TPVG: +80. 0%), 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.
09What are the main differences between MXC and TPVG and USEG?
These companies operate in different sectors (MXC (Energy) and TPVG (Financial Services) and USEG (Energy)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: MXC is a small-cap deep-value stock; TPVG is a small-cap high-growth stock; USEG is a small-cap quality compounder stock. MXC, TPVG pay a dividend while USEG does not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.