Oil & Gas Exploration & Production
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
TPET vs CALI vs TUSK vs FORR vs BATL
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Auto - Dealerships
Conglomerates
Consulting Services
Oil & Gas Exploration & Production
TPET vs CALI vs TUSK vs FORR vs BATL — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Oil & Gas Exploration & Production | Auto - Dealerships | Conglomerates | Consulting Services | Oil & Gas Exploration & Production |
| Market Cap | $4M | $203M | $113M | $125M | $47M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $399K | $514M | $103M | $397M | $165M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-7M | $-1M | $-64M | $-119M | $12M |
| Gross Margin | 50.0% | 0.4% | 2.7% | 64.6% | 72.8% |
| Operating Margin | -13.2% | -0.2% | -27.9% | -20.9% | -4.0% |
| Forward P/E | — | 50.9x | 23.5x | 8.5x | 12.4x |
| Total Debt | $467K | $60M | $3M | $72M | $23M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $882K | $3M | $102M | $63M | $28M |
TPET vs CALI vs TUSK vs FORR vs BATL — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Apr 23 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trio Petroleum Corp. (TPET) | 100 | 1.1 | -98.9% |
| China Auto Logistic… (CALI) | 100 | 100.7 | +0.7% |
| Mammoth Energy Serv… (TUSK) | 100 | 63.7 | -36.3% |
| Forrester Research,… (FORR) | 100 | 21.1 | -78.9% |
| Battalion Oil Corpo… (BATL) | 100 | 40.6 | -59.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TPET vs CALI vs TUSK vs FORR vs BATL
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TPET is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth is your priority.
- 87.0% revenue growth vs TUSK's -76.4%
CALI ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 4.6%, EPS growth 133.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 0.6%
- 49.7% 10Y total return vs BATL's -72.1%
- Beta 0.01, current ratio 1.17x
- Beta 0.01 vs FORR's 0.68
TUSK is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.66, Low D/E 1.3%, current ratio 2.53x
FORR is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 6 yrs, beta 0.68
- Lower P/E (8.5x vs 23.5x)
BATL carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for quality and dividends.
- 7.2% margin vs TPET's -18.3%
- 100.0% yield; 4-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
- +128.8% vs TPET's -63.2%
- 2.4% ROA vs TPET's -54.7%, ROIC -3.4% vs -38.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 87.0% revenue growth vs TUSK's -76.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.5x vs 23.5x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 7.2% margin vs TPET's -18.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.01 vs FORR's 0.68 | |
| Dividends | 100.0% yield; 4-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +128.8% vs TPET's -63.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 2.4% ROA vs TPET's -54.7%, ROIC -3.4% vs -38.5% |
TPET vs CALI vs TUSK vs FORR vs BATL — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
TPET vs CALI vs TUSK vs FORR vs BATL — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
BATL leads in 3 of 6 categories
CALI leads 1 • FORR leads 1 • TPET leads 0 • TUSK leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BATL leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CALI is the larger business by revenue, generating $514M annually — 1290.1x TPET's $398,734. BATL is the more profitable business, keeping 7.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to TPET's -18.3%. On growth, TPET holds the edge at +123.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $398,734 | $514M | $103M | $397M | $165M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$5M | -$969,068 | -$15M | -$66M | $74M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$7M | -$1M | -$64M | -$119M | $12M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$3M | $466,701 | -$54M | $18M | $39M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +50.0% | +0.4% | +2.7% | +64.6% | +72.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -13.2% | -0.2% | -27.9% | -20.9% | -4.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -18.3% | -0.3% | -61.8% | -30.1% | +7.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -6.7% | +0.1% | -52.1% | +4.6% | +23.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +123.0% | +30.1% | -82.2% | -6.5% | -37.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +60.5% | -3.6% | +156.3% | -79.1% | +59.0% |
Valuation Metrics
BATL leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 23.5x trailing earnings, TUSK trades at a 54% valuation discount to CALI's 50.9x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, FORR's 8.0x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than CALI's 829.2x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4M | $203M | $113M | $125M | $47M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $4M | $260M | $15M | $134M | $42M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.58x | 50.92x | 23.50x | -1.04x | -1.28x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | 8.54x | 12.43x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 829.19x | — | 8.00x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 10.52x | 0.44x | 2.56x | 0.32x | 0.29x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.37x | 8.63x | 0.44x | 0.98x | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 6.92x | 1.20x |
Profitability & Efficiency
BATL leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
BATL delivers a 14.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $15 in annual profit, vs $-81 for FORR. TUSK carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CALI's 2.55x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BATL scores 8/9 vs FORR's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -63.5% | -5.4% | -25.0% | -80.8% | +14.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -54.7% | -0.9% | -18.1% | -28.2% | +2.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -38.5% | +0.1% | -25.9% | +0.8% | -3.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -51.6% | +0.8% | -23.9% | +0.8% | -1.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.04x | 2.55x | 0.01x | 0.57x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$414,983 | $57M | -$99M | $9M | -$5M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $882,162 | $3M | $102M | $63M | $28M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $467,179 | $60M | $3M | $72M | $23M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -11.03x | 0.35x | -82.84x | -30.30x | 0.57x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CALI leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CALI five years ago would be worth $5,429,458,654 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $102 for TPET. Over the past 12 months, BATL leads with a +128.8% total return vs TPET's -63.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CALI at 2.8% vs TPET's -77.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -43.4% | +0.4% | +19.3% | -19.9% | +140.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -63.2% | +2.9% | -6.4% | -35.7% | +128.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.8% | +8.5% | -36.7% | -74.5% | -54.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.0% | +54294486.5% | -35.4% | -85.9% | -77.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.0% | +4974.3% | -78.5% | -75.9% | -72.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -77.3% | +2.8% | -14.1% | -36.6% | -23.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — TPET and CALI each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TPET is the less volatile stock with a -2.78 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FORR's 0.68 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CALI currently trades 99.3% from its 52-week high vs BATL's 9.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -2.78x | 0.01x | 0.66x | 0.68x | -1.71x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $2.50 | $50.79 | $3.12 | $11.57 | $29.70 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.35 | $50.04 | $1.72 | $4.88 | $1.00 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +18.5% | +99.3% | +75.3% | +56.4% | +9.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 39.1 | 42.5 | 47.1 | 51.6 | 37.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 44.1M | 84K | 296K | 109K | 16.6M |
Analyst Outlook
FORR leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TUSK as "Hold", FORR as "Hold", BATL as "Buy". BATL is the only dividend payer here at 100.00% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | — | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — | $7.00 | — | — |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | — | 13 | 4 | 2 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | +100.0% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | $2.96 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +2.0% | 0.0% |
BATL leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). CALI leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
TPET vs CALI vs TUSK vs FORR vs BATL: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TPET or CALI or TUSK or FORR or BATL a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Trio Petroleum Corp.
(TPET) is the stronger pick with 87. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -76. 4% for Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. (TUSK). Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. (TUSK) offers the better valuation at 23. 5x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Battalion Oil Corporation (BATL) a "Buy" — based on 2 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 — TPET or CALI or TUSK or FORR or BATL?
On trailing P/E, Mammoth Energy Services, Inc.
(TUSK) is the cheapest at 23. 5x versus China Auto Logistics Inc. at 50. 9x. On forward P/E, Forrester Research, Inc. is actually cheaper at 8. 5x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TPET or CALI or TUSK or FORR or BATL?
Over the past 5 years, China Auto Logistics Inc.
(CALI) delivered a total return of +542945%, compared to -99. 0% for Trio Petroleum Corp. (TPET). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CALI returned +49. 7% versus TPET's -99. 0%. 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 — TPET or CALI or TUSK or FORR or BATL?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Trio Petroleum Corp.
(TPET) is the lower-risk stock at -2. 78β versus Forrester Research, Inc. 's 0. 68β — meaning FORR is approximately -125% more volatile than TPET relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. (TUSK) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 3% for China Auto Logistics Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TPET or CALI or TUSK or FORR or BATL?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Trio Petroleum Corp.
(TPET) is pulling ahead at 87. 0% versus -76. 4% for Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. (TUSK). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: China Auto Logistics Inc. grew EPS 133. 2% year-over-year, compared to -1993. 3% for Forrester Research, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CALI leads at 0. 6% 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 — TPET or CALI or TUSK or FORR or BATL?
Battalion Oil Corporation (BATL) is the more profitable company, earning 7.
2% net margin versus -1826. 3% for Trio Petroleum Corp. — meaning it keeps 7. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FORR leads at 0. 5% versus -1322. 2% for TPET. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BATL leads at 72. 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.
07Is TPET or CALI or TUSK or FORR or BATL more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Forrester Research, Inc.
(FORR) trades at 8. 5x forward P/E versus 12. 4x for Battalion Oil Corporation — 3. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis.
08Which pays a better dividend — TPET or CALI or TUSK or FORR or BATL?
In this comparison, BATL (100.
0% yield) pays a dividend. TPET, CALI, TUSK, FORR do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is TPET or CALI or TUSK or FORR or BATL better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Trio Petroleum Corp.
(TPET) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -2. 78)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (TPET: -99. 0%, FORR: -75. 9%), 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 TPET and CALI and TUSK and FORR and BATL?
These companies operate in different sectors (TPET (Energy) and CALI (Consumer Cyclical) and TUSK (Industrials) and FORR (Industrials) and BATL (Energy)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: TPET is a small-cap high-growth stock; CALI is a small-cap quality compounder stock; TUSK is a small-cap quality compounder stock; FORR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; BATL is a small-cap income-oriented stock. BATL pays a dividend while TPET, CALI, TUSK, FORR 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.