TPL vs FANG

For growth investors, Diamondback Energy, Inc.

(FANG) is the stronger pick with 36. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 13. 1% for Texas Pacific Land Corporation (TPL). Diamondback Energy, Inc. (FANG) offers the better valuation at 34. 0x trailing P/E (10. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Texas Pacific Land Corporation (TPL) a "Buy" — based on 5 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.

On trailing P/E, Diamondback Energy, Inc.

(FANG) is the cheapest at 34. 0x versus Texas Pacific Land Corporation at 60. 2x. On forward P/E, Diamondback Energy, Inc. is actually cheaper at 10. 9x.

Over the past 5 years, Diamondback Energy, Inc.

(FANG) delivered a total return of +175. 7%, compared to -18. 5% for Texas Pacific Land Corporation (TPL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: TPL returned +777. 4% versus FANG's +168. 8%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Diamondback Energy, Inc.

(FANG) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 09β versus Texas Pacific Land Corporation's 0. 31β — meaning TPL is approximately 244% more volatile than FANG relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Texas Pacific Land Corporation (TPL) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 34% for Diamondback Energy, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Diamondback Energy, Inc.

(FANG) is pulling ahead at 36. 3% versus 13. 1% for Texas Pacific Land Corporation (TPL). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Texas Pacific Land Corporation grew EPS 6. 0% year-over-year, compared to -63. 1% for Diamondback Energy, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, FANG leads at 16. 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.

Texas Pacific Land Corporation (TPL) is the more profitable company, earning 60.

3% net margin versus 11. 1% for Diamondback Energy, Inc. — meaning it keeps 60. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TPL leads at 74. 2% versus 32. 7% for FANG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — TPL leads at 100. 0%, 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.

On forward earnings alone, Diamondback Energy, Inc.

(FANG) trades at 10. 9x forward P/E versus 43. 9x for Texas Pacific Land Corporation — 33. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for TPL: 52. 2% to $639. 00.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Diamondback Energy, Inc. (FANG) offers the highest yield at 2. 0%, versus 0. 5% for Texas Pacific Land Corporation (TPL).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Texas Pacific Land Corporation (TPL) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

31), 0. 5% yield, +777. 4% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (TPL: +777. 4%, FANG: +168. 8%), 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.

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: TPL is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; FANG is a mid-cap high-growth 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.