Marine Shipping
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
NAT vs STNG vs TNK vs TPVG vs FRO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Oil & Gas Midstream
Oil & Gas Midstream
Asset Management
Oil & Gas Midstream
NAT vs STNG vs TNK vs TPVG vs FRO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Marine Shipping | Oil & Gas Midstream | Oil & Gas Midstream | Asset Management | Oil & Gas Midstream |
| Market Cap | $1.24B | $4.38B | $2.83B | $243M | $8.48B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $281M | $1.04B | $952M | $97M | $1.77B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $2M | $502M | $351M | $-12M | $218M |
| Gross Margin | 16.6% | 51.8% | 27.5% | 83.5% | 26.5% |
| Operating Margin | 6.2% | 38.8% | 27.5% | 77.9% | 25.5% |
| Forward P/E | 10.4x | 8.6x | 6.0x | 6.5x | 6.0x |
| Total Debt | $270M | $619M | $55M | $469M | $3.75B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $39M | $752M | $831M | $20M | $414M |
NAT vs STNG vs TNK vs TPVG vs FRO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nordic American Tan… (NAT) | 100 | 128.0 | +28.0% |
| Scorpio Tankers Inc. (STNG) | 100 | 477.4 | +377.4% |
| Teekay Tankers Ltd. (TNK) | 100 | 467.6 | +367.6% |
| TriplePoint Venture… (TPVG) | 100 | 59.8 | -40.2% |
| Frontline Ltd. (FRO) | 100 | 417.3 | +317.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NAT vs STNG vs TNK vs TPVG vs FRO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NAT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and defensive is your priority.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.27, yield 7.1%
- Beta 0.27, yield 7.1%, current ratio 1.65x
- Beta 0.27 vs TPVG's 0.83, lower leverage
- +142.1% vs TPVG's +19.3%
STNG is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.28, Low D/E 19.4%, current ratio 9.33x
TNK ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.19 vs TPVG's 6.41
- Lower P/E (6.0x vs 6.5x), PEG 0.19 vs 6.41
- 15.7% ROA vs TPVG's -1.5%, ROIC 12.5% vs 7.2%
TPVG carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 36.6%, EPS growth 48.8%
- 36.6% NII/revenue growth vs STNG's -24.6%
- 50.6% margin vs NAT's 0.7%
- 17.1% yield, vs STNG's 2.0%
FRO is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 5.1% 10Y total return vs TNK's 187.7%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 36.6% NII/revenue growth vs STNG's -24.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (6.0x vs 6.5x), PEG 0.19 vs 6.41 | |
| Quality / Margins | 50.6% margin vs NAT's 0.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.27 vs TPVG's 0.83, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 17.1% yield, vs STNG's 2.0% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +142.1% vs TPVG's +19.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 15.7% ROA vs TPVG's -1.5%, ROIC 12.5% vs 7.2% |
NAT vs STNG vs TNK vs TPVG vs FRO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
NAT vs STNG vs TNK vs TPVG vs FRO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
TPVG leads in 1 of 6 categories
TNK leads 1 • FRO leads 1 • NAT leads 0 • STNG leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — STNG and TPVG each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FRO is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.8B annually — 18.2x TPVG's $97M. TPVG is the more profitable business, keeping 50.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NAT's 0.7%. On growth, STNG holds the edge at +46.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $281M | $1.0B | $952M | $97M | $1.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $75M | $580M | $348M | -$22M | $781M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $2M | $502M | $351M | -$12M | $218M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$112M | $389M | $113M | $35M | $557M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +16.6% | +51.8% | +27.5% | +83.5% | +26.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +6.2% | +38.8% | +27.5% | +77.9% | +25.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +0.7% | +48.4% | +36.9% | +50.6% | +12.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -39.8% | +37.5% | +11.8% | -58.7% | +31.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -8.8% | +46.2% | -26.4% | — | -11.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -131.5% | +2.5% | +46.0% | -2.3% | -33.3% |
Valuation Metrics
TPVG leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 4.9x trailing earnings, TPVG trades at a 82% valuation discount to NAT's 26.6x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), TNK offers better value at 0.26x vs TPVG's 4.84x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.2B | $4.4B | $2.8B | $243M | $8.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.5B | $4.3B | $2.1B | $691M | $11.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 26.59x | 12.05x | 8.05x | 4.91x | 17.09x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 10.40x | 8.58x | 6.00x | 6.50x | 5.99x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.36x | 0.26x | 4.84x | 0.73x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 11.01x | 8.68x | 6.80x | 9.13x | 10.54x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 3.54x | 4.67x | 2.97x | 2.50x | 4.14x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.41x | 1.30x | 1.38x | 0.68x | 3.62x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 9.87x | 8.92x | 25.09x | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
TNK leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
TNK delivers a 17.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $17 in annual profit, vs $-3 for TPVG. TNK carries lower financial leverage with a 0.03x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FRO's 1.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), STNG scores 6/9 vs TNK's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +0.4% | +15.9% | +17.2% | -3.4% | +9.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.2% | +12.6% | +15.7% | -1.5% | +3.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.5% | +7.2% | +12.5% | +7.2% | +10.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +9.9% | +8.4% | +10.9% | +9.4% | +14.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.53x | 0.19x | 0.03x | 1.33x | 1.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $231M | -$133M | -$776M | $449M | $3.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $39M | $752M | $831M | $20M | $414M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $270M | $619M | $55M | $469M | $3.7B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.06x | 6.82x | 109.95x | -1.02x | 1.87x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
FRO leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in TNK five years ago would be worth $61,384 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,649 for TPVG. Over the past 12 months, NAT leads with a +142.1% total return vs TPVG's +19.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors FRO at 44.8% vs TPVG's -1.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +78.6% | +71.3% | +58.3% | -6.3% | +90.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +142.1% | +115.3% | +80.3% | +19.3% | +132.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +107.6% | +92.7% | +136.5% | -3.4% | +203.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +117.0% | +359.0% | +513.8% | -13.5% | +465.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -40.4% | +62.8% | +187.7% | +93.3% | +513.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +27.6% | +24.4% | +33.2% | -1.2% | +44.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — NAT and TNK each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
NAT is the less volatile stock with a 0.27 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than TPVG's 0.83 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. TNK currently trades 97.3% from its 52-week high vs TPVG's 79.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.27x | 0.28x | 0.35x | 0.83x | 0.36x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $6.34 | $87.39 | $83.54 | $7.53 | $39.89 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.54 | $37.96 | $41.05 | $4.48 | $16.25 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +92.3% | +96.9% | +97.3% | +79.5% | +95.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 52.4 | 60.5 | 57.9 | 58.3 | 61.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 5.3M | 1.2M | 542K | 504K | 4.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — STNG and TPVG each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NAT as "Hold", STNG as "Buy", TNK as "Buy", TPVG as "Hold", FRO as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 49.4% upside for TPVG (target: $9) vs -40.2% for NAT (target: $4). For income investors, TPVG offers the higher dividend yield at 17.11% vs STNG's 1.99%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $3.50 | $85.33 | $90.00 | $8.95 | $38.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 19 | 31 | 23 | 12 | 22 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +7.1% | +2.0% | +2.4% | +17.1% | +5.1% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.42 | $1.69 | $1.98 | $1.02 | $1.95 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.3% | +0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
TPVG leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). TNK leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
NAT vs STNG vs TNK vs TPVG vs FRO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NAT or STNG or TNK or TPVG or FRO 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 -24. 6% for Scorpio Tankers Inc. (STNG). TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. (TPVG) offers the better valuation at 4. 9x trailing P/E (6. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Scorpio Tankers Inc. (STNG) a "Buy" — based on 31 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 — NAT or STNG or TNK or TPVG or FRO?
On trailing P/E, TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp.
(TPVG) is the cheapest at 4. 9x versus Nordic American Tankers Limited at 26. 6x. On forward P/E, Frontline Ltd. is actually cheaper at 6. 0x — 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: Teekay Tankers Ltd. wins at 0. 19x versus TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. 's 6. 41x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NAT or STNG or TNK or TPVG or FRO?
Over the past 5 years, Teekay Tankers Ltd.
(TNK) delivered a total return of +513. 8%, compared to -13. 5% for TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. (TPVG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FRO returned +513. 5% versus NAT's -40. 4%. 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 — NAT or STNG or TNK or TPVG or FRO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Nordic American Tankers Limited (NAT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
27β versus TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. 's 0. 83β — meaning TPVG is approximately 205% more volatile than NAT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Teekay Tankers Ltd. (TNK) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 3% versus 160% for Frontline Ltd. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NAT or STNG or TNK or TPVG or FRO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp.
(TPVG) is pulling ahead at 36. 6% versus -24. 6% for Scorpio Tankers Inc. (STNG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. grew EPS 48. 8% year-over-year, compared to -53. 2% for Nordic American Tankers Limited. Over a 3-year CAGR, FRO leads at 39. 9% 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 — NAT or STNG or TNK or TPVG or FRO?
TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp.
(TPVG) is the more profitable company, earning 50. 6% net margin versus 13. 3% for Nordic American Tankers Limited — 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 22. 1% for NAT. 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.
07Is NAT or STNG or TNK or TPVG or FRO 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, Teekay Tankers Ltd. (TNK) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 19x versus TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. 's 6. 41x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Frontline Ltd. (FRO) trades at 6. 0x forward P/E versus 10. 4x for Nordic American Tankers Limited — 4. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for TPVG: 49. 4% to $8. 95.
08Which pays a better dividend — NAT or STNG or TNK or TPVG or FRO?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. (TPVG) offers the highest yield at 17. 1%, versus 2. 0% for Scorpio Tankers Inc. (STNG).
09Is NAT or STNG or TNK or TPVG or FRO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Frontline Ltd.
(FRO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 36), 5. 1% yield, +513. 5% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FRO: +513. 5%, TPVG: +93. 3%), 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 NAT and STNG and TNK and TPVG and FRO?
These companies operate in different sectors (NAT (Industrials) and STNG (Energy) and TNK (Energy) and TPVG (Financial Services) and FRO (Energy)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: NAT is a small-cap income-oriented stock; STNG is a small-cap deep-value stock; TNK is a small-cap deep-value stock; TPVG is a small-cap high-growth stock; FRO 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.
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.