Comprehensive Stock Comparison
Compare Suncor Energy Inc. (SU) vs Imperial Oil Limited (IMO) vs Cenovus Energy Inc. (CVE) Stock
Analyze side-by-side fundamentals, valuation, growth, and profitability to decide which stock is the better buy.
Selected Stocks
Add up to 10 tickers. Use presets or search to get started.
Quick Verdict
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | IMO | 1.0% revenue growth vs CVE's -14.0% |
| Value | SU | Lower P/E (14.8x vs 15.0x) |
| Quality / Margins | SU | 11.9% net margin vs CVE's 5.7% |
| Stability / Safety | SU | Beta 0.73 vs CVE's 1.13, lower leverage |
| Dividends | SU | 3.0% yield, 4-year raise streak, vs CVE's 2.6% |
| Momentum (1Y) | IMO | +75.9% vs SU's +52.0% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | IMO | 13.0% ROA vs CVE's 5.9%, ROIC 17.5% vs 7.9% |
Who Each Stock Is For
Income & stability
Growth exposure
Long-term compounding (10Y)
Sleep-well-at-night portfolio
Defensive / Recession hedge
Business Model
What each company does and how it makes money
Suncor Energy is an integrated Canadian energy company that develops oil sands resources and operates across the full energy value chain. It generates revenue primarily from oil sands production (~60% of operating earnings), complemented by exploration and production assets, and refining/marketing operations through its Petro-Canada retail network. The company's key advantage is its integrated business model—controlling production, upgrading, refining, and retail distribution—which provides operational stability and cost efficiencies across volatile energy cycles.
Imperial Oil is a major integrated Canadian oil and gas company that explores for, produces, refines, and markets petroleum products. It generates revenue through upstream oil and gas production (~60% of earnings) and downstream refining/marketing operations (~40%), including its network of Esso and Mobil-branded retail stations. The company benefits from integrated operations—controlling the entire value chain from production to retail—and extensive infrastructure assets including refineries, pipelines, and a large retail network.
Cenovus Energy is an integrated Canadian oil and gas company that develops and produces crude oil, natural gas liquids, and natural gas. It makes money primarily through oil sands production (~60% of upstream volumes) and conventional oil/gas operations, supplemented by refining and marketing through its manufacturing and retail segments. The company's key advantage is its integrated model—combining upstream production with downstream refining capacity—which provides operational flexibility and margin stability across the energy value chain.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Financial Metrics Comparison
Side-by-side fundamentals across 3 stocks. BestLagging
Financial Scorecard
SU leads in 2 of 6 categories (Financial Metrics, Risk & Volatility). IMO leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). 2 tied.
Financial Metrics (TTM)
CVE and IMO operate at a comparable scale, with $55.5B and $46.2B in trailing revenue. SU is the more profitable business, keeping 11.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CVE's 5.7%. On growth, SU holds the edge at -4.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | SUSuncor Energy Inc. | IMOImperial Oil Limi… | CVECenovus Energy In… |
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $49.7B | $46.2B | $55.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $15.5B | $7.5B | $10.8B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $5.9B | $4.0B | $3.1B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $6.9B | $4.8B | $2.8B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +42.7% | +13.9% | +20.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +16.1% | +10.9% | +10.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +11.9% | +8.6% | +5.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +13.9% | +10.3% | +5.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -4.0% | -7.2% | -7.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +89.2% | -53.9% | +71.4% |
Valuation Metrics
At 14.2x trailing earnings, CVE trades at a 20% valuation discount to IMO's 17.8x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, SU's 6.9x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than IMO's 10.1x.
| Metric | SUSuncor Energy Inc. | IMOImperial Oil Limi… | CVECenovus Energy In… |
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $67.3B | $58.3B | $42.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $78.0B | $60.6B | $52.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 15.95x | 17.80x | 14.20x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 14.81x | 24.10x | 15.03x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.71x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 6.90x | 10.06x | 7.32x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.88x | 1.64x | 1.16x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.09x | 3.63x | 1.76x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 13.30x | 19.39x | 16.91x |
Profitability & Efficiency
IMO delivers a 23.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $24 in annual profit, vs $11 for CVE. IMO carries lower financial leverage with a 0.18x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CVE's 0.54x.
| Metric | SUSuncor Energy Inc. | IMOImperial Oil Limi… | CVECenovus Energy In… |
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +13.1% | +23.5% | +11.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +6.6% | +13.0% | +5.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +10.4% | +17.5% | +7.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +10.1% | +17.3% | +8.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 6 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.41x | 0.18x | 0.54x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $14.7B | $3.2B | $14.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $3.6B | $979M | $2.7B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $18.4B | $4.2B | $17.0B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 12.93x | 372.25x | 7.64x |
Total Returns (with DRIP)
A $10,000 investment in IMO five years ago would be worth $56,452 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $31,433 for SU. Over the past 12 months, IMO leads with a +75.9% total return vs SU's +52.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors IMO at 35.4% vs CVE's 9.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | SUSuncor Energy Inc. | IMOImperial Oil Limi… | CVECenovus Energy In… |
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +24.0% | +31.7% | +27.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +52.0% | +75.9% | +65.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +82.6% | +148.2% | +29.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +214.3% | +464.5% | +226.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +181.2% | +299.7% | +118.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +22.2% | +35.4% | +9.0% |
Risk & Volatility
SU is the less volatile stock with a 0.73 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CVE's 1.13 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. SU currently trades 98.9% from its 52-week high vs IMO's 95.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | SUSuncor Energy Inc. | IMOImperial Oil Limi… | CVECenovus Energy In… |
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.73x | 0.75x | 1.13x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $57.13 | $123.52 | $23.39 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $30.79 | $58.76 | $10.23 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +98.9% | +95.0% | +95.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 61.8 | 59.7 | 61.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 4.2M | 568K | 10.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: SU as "Buy", IMO as "Hold", CVE as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 24.0% upside for CVE (target: $28) vs -61.6% for IMO (target: $45). For income investors, SU offers the higher dividend yield at 2.97% vs IMO's 1.45%.
| Metric | SUSuncor Energy Inc. | IMOImperial Oil Limi… | CVECenovus Energy In… |
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $62.00 | $44.99 | $27.67 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 31 | 20 | 27 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.0% | +1.5% | +2.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 4 | 26 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $2.30 | $2.33 | $0.78 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +3.4% | +3.4% | +4.3% |
Historical Charts
Charts are rendered on first load. Hover for details.
Chart 1Total Return — 5 Years (Rebased to 100)
| Stock | Mar 20 | Feb 26 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Suncor Energy Inc. (SU) | 100 | 190.11 | +90.1% |
| Imperial Oil Limited (IMO) | 100 | 454.15 | +354.2% |
| Cenovus Energy Inc. (CVE) | 100 | 260.86 | +160.9% |
Imperial Oil Limited (IMO) returned +465% over 5 years vs Suncor Energy Inc. (SU)'s +214%. A $10,000 investment in IMO 5 years ago would be worth $56,452 today (including dividends reinvested).
Chart 2Revenue Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Suncor Energy Inc. (SU) | $26.8B | $48.9B | +82.3% |
| Imperial Oil Limited (IMO) | $23.6B | $48.8B | +107.0% |
| Cenovus Energy Inc. (CVE) | $11.0B | $49.7B | +350.8% |
Suncor Energy Inc.'s revenue grew from $26.8B (2016) to $48.9B (2025) — a 6.9% CAGR.
Chart 3Net Margin Trend — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Suncor Energy Inc. (SU) | 1.6% | 12.1% | +647.4% |
| Imperial Oil Limited (IMO) | 9.3% | 9.8% | +6.0% |
| Cenovus Energy Inc. (CVE) | -4.9% | 7.9% | +259.8% |
Suncor Energy Inc.'s net margin went from 2% (2016) to 12% (2025).
Chart 4P/E Ratio History — 8 Years
| Stock | 2017 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Suncor Energy Inc. (SU) | 13.7 | 9.1 | -33.6% |
| Imperial Oil Limited (IMO) | 53 | 6.8 | -87.2% |
| Cenovus Energy Inc. (CVE) | 3 | 7.9 | +163.3% |
Suncor Energy Inc. has traded in a 5x–18x P/E range over 8 years; current trailing P/E is ~16x. Imperial Oil Limited has traded in a 4x–53x P/E range over 7 years; current trailing P/E is ~18x.
Chart 5EPS Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Suncor Energy Inc. (SU) | 0.27 | 4.85 | +1696.3% |
| Imperial Oil Limited (IMO) | 2.57 | 9.02 | +251.0% |
| Cenovus Energy Inc. (CVE) | -0.65 | 2.15 | +430.8% |
Suncor Energy Inc.'s EPS grew from $0.27 (2016) to $4.85 (2025) — a 38% CAGR.
Chart 6Free Cash Flow — 5 Years
Suncor Energy Inc. generated $7B FCF in 2025 (-4% vs 2021). Imperial Oil Limited generated $4B FCF in 2024 (-6% vs 2021).
SU vs IMO vs CVE: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SU or IMO or CVE a better buy right now?
Cenovus Energy Inc. (CVE) offers the better valuation at 14.2x trailing P/E (15.0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Suncor Energy Inc. (SU) 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 — SU or IMO or CVE?
On trailing P/E, Cenovus Energy Inc. (CVE) is the cheapest at 14.2x versus Imperial Oil Limited at 17.8x. On forward P/E, Suncor Energy Inc. is actually cheaper at 14.8x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SU or IMO or CVE?
Over the past 5 years, Imperial Oil Limited (IMO) delivered a total return of +464.5%, compared to +214.3% for Suncor Energy Inc. (SU). A $10,000 investment in IMO five years ago would be worth approximately $56K today (assuming dividends reinvested). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IMO returned +299.7% versus CVE's +118.6%. 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 — SU or IMO or CVE?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Suncor Energy Inc. (SU) is the lower-risk stock at 0.73β versus Cenovus Energy Inc.'s 1.13β — meaning CVE is approximately 55% more volatile than SU relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Imperial Oil Limited (IMO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 18% versus 54% for Cenovus Energy Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which has better profit margins — SU or IMO or CVE?
Suncor Energy Inc. (SU) is the more profitable company, earning 12.1% net margin versus 7.9% for Cenovus Energy Inc. — meaning it keeps 12.1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: SU leads at 16.3% versus 8.8% for CVE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SU leads at 43.4%, 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.
06Is SU or IMO or CVE more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Suncor Energy Inc. (SU) trades at 14.8x forward P/E versus 24.1x for Imperial Oil Limited — 9.3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CVE: 24.0% to $27.67.
07Which pays a better dividend — SU or IMO or CVE?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends. Suncor Energy Inc. (SU) offers the highest yield at 3.0%, versus 1.5% for Imperial Oil Limited (IMO).
08Is SU or IMO or CVE better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Imperial Oil Limited (IMO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.75), 1.5% yield, +299.7% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (IMO: +299.7%, CVE: +118.6%), 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 SU and IMO and CVE?
Both stocks operate in the Energy sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both. 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 beat both.