Oil & Gas Drilling
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
PTEN vs HP vs NBR vs PD vs NINE
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Oil & Gas Drilling
Oil & Gas Drilling
Software - Application
Oil & Gas Equipment & Services
PTEN vs HP vs NBR vs PD vs NINE — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Oil & Gas Drilling | Oil & Gas Drilling | Oil & Gas Drilling | Software - Application | Oil & Gas Equipment & Services |
| Market Cap | $4.33B | $3.68B | $1.54B | $680M | $427M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $4.66B | $4.00B | $3.18B | $493M | $571M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-119M | $-376M | $263M | $174M | $-41M |
| Gross Margin | 8.8% | 11.3% | 25.0% | 84.9% | 11.5% |
| Operating Margin | -1.6% | -1.8% | 13.8% | 0.7% | 2.0% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 5.6x | 6.6x | — |
| Total Debt | $1.28B | $2.32B | $2.57B | $413M | $383M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $421M | $224M | $941M | $237M | $18M |
PTEN vs HP vs NBR vs PD vs NINE — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Patterson-UTI Energ… (PTEN) | 100 | 309.2 | +209.2% |
| Helmerich & Payne, … (HP) | 100 | 183.3 | +83.3% |
| Nabors Industries L… (NBR) | 100 | 260.4 | +160.4% |
| PagerDuty, Inc. (PD) | 100 | 27.9 | -72.1% |
| Nine Energy Service… (NINE) | 100 | 485.2 | +385.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: PTEN vs HP vs NBR vs PD vs NINE
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
PTEN has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.59, yield 2.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.59, Low D/E 39.7%, current ratio 1.64x
- Beta 0.59, yield 2.8%, current ratio 1.64x
- Beta 0.59 vs NINE's 3.21
HP ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 35.9%, EPS growth -148.4%, 3Y rev CAGR 22.1%
- -3.5% 10Y total return vs PTEN's -22.1%
- 35.9% revenue growth vs NINE's -100.0%
NBR is the clearest fit if your priority is value.
- Better valuation composite
PD is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and efficiency is your priority.
- 35.3% margin vs HP's -9.4%
- 18.1% ROA vs NINE's -11.5%, ROIC 1.2% vs 0.7%
NINE is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +15.1% vs PD's -51.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 35.9% revenue growth vs NINE's -100.0% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 35.3% margin vs HP's -9.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.59 vs NINE's 3.21 | |
| Dividends | 2.8% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs HP's 2.8%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +15.1% vs PD's -51.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 18.1% ROA vs NINE's -11.5%, ROIC 1.2% vs 0.7% |
PTEN vs HP vs NBR vs PD vs NINE — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
PTEN vs HP vs NBR vs PD vs NINE — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
PD leads in 2 of 6 categories
NBR leads 1 • NINE leads 1 • PTEN leads 1 • HP leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PD leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PTEN is the larger business by revenue, generating $4.7B annually — 9.5x PD's $493M. PD is the more profitable business, keeping 35.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to HP's -9.4%. On growth, NBR holds the edge at +9.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $4.7B | $4.0B | $3.2B | $493M | $571M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $851M | $657M | $1.1B | $22M | $61M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$119M | -$376M | $263M | $174M | -$41M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $273M | $256M | -$23M | $111M | -$7M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +8.8% | +11.3% | +25.0% | +84.9% | +11.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -1.6% | -1.8% | +13.8% | +0.7% | +2.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -2.6% | -9.4% | +8.3% | +35.3% | -7.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +5.9% | +6.4% | -0.7% | +22.5% | -1.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -12.7% | -8.2% | +9.3% | +2.7% | -4.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -47.8% | +102.5% | +2.0% | -34.6% |
Valuation Metrics
NBR leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 4.0x trailing earnings, PD trades at a 30% valuation discount to NBR's 5.6x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, NBR's 3.5x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than NINE's 337.0x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4.3B | $3.7B | $1.5B | $680M | $427M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $5.2B | $5.8B | $3.2B | $856M | $791M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -47.54x | -22.23x | 5.62x | 3.96x | -7.88x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | 6.59x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 5.67x | 6.74x | 3.47x | 146.57x | 337.01x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.90x | 0.98x | 0.48x | 1.38x | — |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.36x | 1.29x | 0.97x | 2.55x | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 11.64x | 31.61x | — | 6.08x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
PD leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
PD delivers a 71.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $72 in annual profit, vs $-14 for HP. PTEN carries lower financial leverage with a 0.40x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NBR's 1.78x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NBR scores 7/9 vs NINE's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -3.7% | -13.6% | +17.8% | +71.6% | — |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -2.2% | -5.7% | +5.3% | +18.1% | -11.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -0.4% | +3.7% | +6.2% | +1.2% | +0.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -0.5% | +4.1% | +6.8% | +0.9% | +0.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 3 | 7 | 6 | 1 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.40x | 0.82x | 1.78x | 1.53x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $860M | $2.1B | $1.6B | $176M | $364M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $421M | $224M | $941M | $237M | $18M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.3B | $2.3B | $2.6B | $413M | $383M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -0.96x | -1.92x | 3.07x | 3.47x | 0.24x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NINE leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in NINE five years ago would be worth $48,522 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,974 for PD. Over the past 12 months, NINE leads with a +1505.8% total return vs PD's -51.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NINE at 35.7% vs PD's -36.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +77.9% | +24.1% | +74.2% | -40.2% | +2682.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +111.0% | +99.5% | +273.7% | -51.6% | +1505.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +17.3% | +29.1% | +0.6% | -74.6% | +150.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +48.7% | +44.0% | -2.5% | -80.3% | +385.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -22.1% | -3.5% | -67.0% | -80.6% | -62.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +5.5% | +8.9% | +0.2% | -36.6% | +35.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — PTEN and NINE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
PTEN is the less volatile stock with a 0.59 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NINE's 3.21 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. NINE currently trades 96.3% from its 52-week high vs PD's 41.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.59x | 0.87x | 1.53x | 1.26x | 3.21x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $12.62 | $41.68 | $105.80 | $18.00 | $10.23 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $5.10 | $14.65 | $23.27 | $5.70 | $0.00 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +90.4% | +88.5% | +91.2% | +41.2% | +96.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.4 | 60.7 | 62.3 | 51.4 | 82.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 10.6M | 1.2M | 348K | 2.8M | 125K |
Analyst Outlook
PTEN leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: PTEN as "Buy", HP as "Hold", NBR as "Hold", PD as "Hold", NINE as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 99.7% upside for PD (target: $15) vs -16.1% for NBR (target: $81). For income investors, PTEN offers the higher dividend yield at 2.80% vs NBR's 0.43%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Hold | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $11.00 | $36.86 | $81.00 | $14.80 | $18.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 53 | 43 | 44 | 23 | 9 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.8% | +2.8% | +0.4% | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 0 | 1 | — | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.32 | $1.01 | $0.42 | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.6% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +19.8% | 0.0% |
PD leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). NBR leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
PTEN vs HP vs NBR vs PD vs NINE: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is PTEN or HP or NBR or PD or NINE a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Helmerich & Payne, Inc.
(HP) is the stronger pick with 35. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -100. 0% for Nine Energy Service, Inc. (NINE). PagerDuty, Inc. (PD) offers the better valuation at 4. 0x trailing P/E (6. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Patterson-UTI Energy, Inc. (PTEN) a "Buy" — based on 53 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 — PTEN or HP or NBR or PD or NINE?
On trailing P/E, PagerDuty, Inc.
(PD) is the cheapest at 4. 0x versus Nabors Industries Ltd. at 5. 6x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — PTEN or HP or NBR or PD or NINE?
Over the past 5 years, Nine Energy Service, Inc.
(NINE) delivered a total return of +385. 2%, compared to -80. 3% for PagerDuty, Inc. (PD). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HP returned -3. 5% versus PD's -80. 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 — PTEN or HP or NBR or PD or NINE?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Patterson-UTI Energy, Inc.
(PTEN) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 59β versus Nine Energy Service, Inc. 's 3. 21β — meaning NINE is approximately 442% more volatile than PTEN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Patterson-UTI Energy, Inc. (PTEN) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 40% versus 178% for Nabors Industries Ltd. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — PTEN or HP or NBR or PD or NINE?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Helmerich & Payne, Inc.
(HP) is pulling ahead at 35. 9% versus -100. 0% for Nine Energy Service, Inc. (NINE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: PagerDuty, Inc. grew EPS 416. 9% year-over-year, compared to -148. 4% for Helmerich & Payne, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, PTEN leads at 22. 2% 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 — PTEN or HP or NBR or PD or NINE?
PagerDuty, Inc.
(PD) is the more profitable company, earning 35. 3% net margin versus -7. 2% for Nine Energy Service, Inc. — meaning it keeps 35. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NBR leads at 8. 3% versus -0. 5% for PTEN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — PD leads at 84. 9%, 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 PTEN or HP or NBR or PD or NINE more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PD: 99.
7% to $14. 80.
08Which pays a better dividend — PTEN or HP or NBR or PD or NINE?
In this comparison, PTEN (2.
8% yield), HP (2. 8% yield), NBR (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. PD, NINE do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is PTEN or HP or NBR or PD or NINE better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Patterson-UTI Energy, Inc.
(PTEN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 59), 2. 8% yield). Nine Energy Service, Inc. (NINE) carries a higher beta of 3. 21 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (PTEN: -22. 1%, NINE: -62. 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 PTEN and HP and NBR and PD and NINE?
These companies operate in different sectors (PTEN (Energy) and HP (Energy) and NBR (Energy) and PD (Technology) and NINE (Energy)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: PTEN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; HP is a small-cap high-growth stock; NBR is a small-cap deep-value stock; PD is a small-cap deep-value stock; NINE is a small-cap quality compounder stock. PTEN, HP pay a dividend while NBR, PD, NINE do 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.
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.