Oil & Gas Drilling
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
PTEN vs NINE vs HP vs PUMP
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Oil & Gas Equipment & Services
Oil & Gas Drilling
Oil & Gas Equipment & Services
PTEN vs NINE vs HP vs PUMP — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Oil & Gas Drilling | Oil & Gas Equipment & Services | Oil & Gas Drilling | Oil & Gas Equipment & Services |
| Market Cap | $4.33B | $427M | $3.68B | $1.91B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $4.66B | $571M | $4.00B | $1.18B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-119M | $-41M | $-376M | $-12M |
| Gross Margin | 8.8% | 11.5% | 11.3% | 8.3% |
| Operating Margin | -1.6% | 2.0% | -1.8% | -1.1% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | — | 1993.6x |
| Total Debt | $1.28B | $383M | $2.32B | $249M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $421M | $18M | $224M | $91M |
PTEN vs NINE vs HP vs PUMP — 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% |
| Nine Energy Service… (NINE) | 100 | 485.2 | +385.2% |
| Helmerich & Payne, … (HP) | 100 | 183.3 | +83.3% |
| ProPetro Holding Co… (PUMP) | 100 | 314.1 | +214.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: PTEN vs NINE vs HP vs PUMP
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
PTEN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.59, yield 2.8%
- Rev growth -10.3%, EPS growth 90.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 22.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.59, Low D/E 39.7%, current ratio 1.64x
- Beta 0.59, yield 2.8%, current ratio 1.64x
NINE is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +15.1% vs HP's +99.5%
HP is the clearest fit if your priority is growth.
- 35.9% revenue growth vs NINE's -100.0%
PUMP is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 7.2% 10Y total return vs HP's -3.5%
- -1.1% margin vs HP's -9.4%
- -1.0% ROA vs NINE's -11.5%, ROIC 1.4% vs 0.7%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 35.9% revenue growth vs NINE's -100.0% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | -1.1% 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 HP's +99.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -1.0% ROA vs NINE's -11.5%, ROIC 1.4% vs 0.7% |
PTEN vs NINE vs HP vs PUMP — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
PTEN vs NINE vs HP vs PUMP — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
NINE leads in 2 of 6 categories
PTEN leads 2 • PUMP leads 1 • HP leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NINE 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 — 8.2x NINE's $571M. PUMP is the more profitable business, keeping -1.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to HP's -9.4%. On growth, NINE holds the edge at -4.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $4.7B | $571M | $4.0B | $1.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $851M | $61M | $657M | $154M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$119M | -$41M | -$376M | -$12M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $273M | -$7M | $256M | -$11M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +8.8% | +11.5% | +11.3% | +8.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -1.6% | +2.0% | -1.8% | -1.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -2.6% | -7.2% | -9.4% | -1.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +5.9% | -1.2% | +6.4% | -0.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -12.7% | -4.4% | -8.2% | -24.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -34.6% | -47.8% | -134.2% |
Valuation Metrics
PTEN leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, PTEN's 5.7x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than NINE's 337.0x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4.3B | $427M | $3.7B | $1.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $5.2B | $791M | $5.8B | $2.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -47.54x | -7.88x | -22.23x | 1993.59x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 5.67x | 337.01x | 6.74x | 10.67x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.90x | — | 0.98x | 1.50x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.36x | — | 1.29x | 1.98x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 11.64x | — | 31.61x | 44.88x |
Profitability & Efficiency
PUMP leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
PUMP delivers a -1.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-1 in annual profit, vs $-14 for HP. PUMP carries lower financial leverage with a 0.30x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to HP's 0.82x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), PTEN scores 5/9 vs NINE's 1/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -3.7% | — | -13.6% | -1.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -2.2% | -11.5% | -5.7% | -1.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -0.4% | +0.7% | +3.7% | +1.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -0.5% | +0.9% | +4.1% | +1.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 1 | 3 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.40x | — | 0.82x | 0.30x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $860M | $364M | $2.1B | $158M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $421M | $18M | $224M | $91M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.3B | $383M | $2.3B | $249M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -0.96x | 0.24x | -1.92x | -0.86x |
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 $14,162 for PUMP. Over the past 12 months, NINE leads with a +1505.8% total return vs HP's +99.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NINE at 35.7% vs PTEN's 5.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +77.9% | +2682.5% | +24.1% | +58.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +111.0% | +1505.8% | +99.5% | +201.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +17.3% | +150.0% | +29.1% | +132.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +48.7% | +385.2% | +44.0% | +41.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -22.1% | -62.3% | -3.5% | +7.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +5.5% | +35.7% | +8.9% | +32.5% |
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 PUMP's 84.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.59x | 3.21x | 0.87x | 1.12x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $12.62 | $10.23 | $41.68 | $18.50 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $5.10 | $0.00 | $14.65 | $4.51 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +90.4% | +96.3% | +88.5% | +84.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.4 | 82.9 | 60.7 | 51.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 10.6M | 125K | 1.2M | 3.5M |
Analyst Outlook
PTEN leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: PTEN as "Buy", NINE as "Hold", HP as "Hold", PUMP as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 82.7% upside for NINE (target: $18) vs -5.1% for PUMP (target: $15). For income investors, PTEN offers the higher dividend yield at 2.80% vs HP's 2.75%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $11.00 | $18.00 | $36.86 | $14.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 53 | 9 | 43 | 30 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.8% | — | +2.8% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 1 | 0 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.32 | — | $1.01 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.6% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
NINE leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). PTEN leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
PTEN vs NINE vs HP vs PUMP: Key Questions Answered
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is PTEN or NINE or HP or PUMP 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). ProPetro Holding Corp. (PUMP) offers the better valuation at 1993. 6x trailing P/E, 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 is the better long-term investment — PTEN or NINE or HP or PUMP?
Over the past 5 years, Nine Energy Service, Inc.
(NINE) delivered a total return of +385. 2%, compared to +41. 6% for ProPetro Holding Corp. (PUMP). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PUMP returned +7. 2% versus NINE's -62. 3%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — PTEN or NINE or HP or PUMP?
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, ProPetro Holding Corp. (PUMP) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 30% versus 82% for Helmerich & Payne, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — PTEN or NINE or HP or PUMP?
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: ProPetro Holding Corp. grew EPS 100. 6% 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.
05Which has better profit margins — PTEN or NINE or HP or PUMP?
ProPetro Holding Corp.
(PUMP) is the more profitable company, earning 0. 1% net margin versus -7. 2% for Nine Energy Service, Inc. — meaning it keeps 0. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HP leads at 6. 2% versus -0. 5% for PTEN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — HP leads at 14. 8%, 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.
06Which pays a better dividend — PTEN or NINE or HP or PUMP?
In this comparison, PTEN (2.
8% yield), HP (2. 8% yield) pay a dividend. NINE, PUMP do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
07Is PTEN or NINE or HP or PUMP 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.
08What are the main differences between PTEN and NINE and HP and PUMP?
Both stocks operate in the Energy sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: PTEN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NINE is a small-cap quality compounder stock; HP is a small-cap high-growth stock; PUMP is a small-cap quality compounder stock. PTEN, HP pay a dividend while NINE, PUMP 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.