Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
UGP vs XOM vs MPC vs PSX vs VLO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Oil & Gas Integrated
Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing
Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing
Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing
UGP vs XOM vs MPC vs PSX vs VLO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing | Oil & Gas Integrated | Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing | Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing | Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing |
| Market Cap | $6.64B | $611.92B | $71.49B | $68.78B | $72.08B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $142.37B | $323.90B | $135.75B | $135.77B | $126.17B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $2.45B | $28.84B | $4.63B | $4.12B | $4.21B |
| Gross Margin | 6.6% | 21.7% | 8.8% | 7.0% | 7.2% |
| Operating Margin | 3.5% | 10.5% | 5.0% | 4.7% | 4.6% |
| Forward P/E | 2.4x | 14.3x | 9.6x | 11.2x | 9.3x |
| Total Debt | $21.82B | $43.54B | $34.36B | $22.88B | $11.70B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $3.17B | $10.68B | $3.67B | $1.12B | $4.69B |
UGP vs XOM vs MPC vs PSX vs VLO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ultrapar Participaç… (UGP) | 100 | 192.1 | +92.1% |
| Exxon Mobil Corpora… (XOM) | 100 | 317.6 | +217.6% |
| Marathon Petroleum … (MPC) | 100 | 696.8 | +596.8% |
| Phillips 66 (PSX) | 100 | 219.2 | +119.2% |
| Valero Energy Corpo… (VLO) | 100 | 361.7 | +261.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: UGP vs XOM vs MPC vs PSX vs VLO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
UGP carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 6.6%, EPS growth 3.8%, 3Y rev CAGR -0.3%
- 6.6% revenue growth vs PSX's -7.6%
- Lower P/E (2.4x vs 11.2x)
- 6.4% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs XOM's 2.8%
XOM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for quality.
- 8.9% margin vs UGP's 1.7%
MPC is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 6.7% 10Y total return vs VLO's 406.2%
Among these 5 stocks, PSX doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
VLO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.16, yield 1.9%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.16, Low D/E 44.0%, current ratio 1.65x
- Beta 0.16, yield 1.9%, current ratio 1.65x
- Beta 0.16 vs UGP's 0.94, lower leverage
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 6.6% revenue growth vs PSX's -7.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (2.4x vs 11.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 8.9% margin vs UGP's 1.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.16 vs UGP's 0.94, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 6.4% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs XOM's 2.8% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +120.4% vs XOM's +39.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 7.1% ROA vs PSX's 5.3%, ROIC 9.5% vs 5.3% |
UGP vs XOM vs MPC vs PSX vs VLO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
UGP vs XOM vs MPC vs PSX vs VLO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
XOM leads in 1 of 6 categories
UGP leads 1 • VLO leads 1 • MPC leads 0 • PSX leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
XOM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
XOM is the larger business by revenue, generating $323.9B annually — 2.6x VLO's $126.2B. XOM is the more profitable business, keeping 8.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to UGP's 1.7%. On growth, PSX holds the edge at +11.7% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $142.4B | $323.9B | $135.8B | $135.8B | $126.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $6.5B | $59.9B | $10.1B | $9.4B | $9.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $2.5B | $28.8B | $4.6B | $4.1B | $4.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $1.4B | $23.6B | $5.7B | $119M | $5.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +6.6% | +21.7% | +8.8% | +7.0% | +7.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +3.5% | +10.5% | +5.0% | +4.7% | +4.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +1.7% | +8.9% | +3.4% | +3.0% | +3.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +1.0% | +7.3% | +4.2% | +0.1% | +4.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +7.2% | -1.3% | +9.7% | +11.7% | +7.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -60.5% | -11.0% | +8.2% | -56.8% | +3.2% |
Valuation Metrics
UGP leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 13.8x trailing earnings, UGP trades at a 57% valuation discount to VLO's 31.8x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, UGP's 8.0x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than PSX's 13.3x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $6.6B | $611.9B | $71.5B | $68.8B | $72.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $10.4B | $644.8B | $102.2B | $90.6B | $79.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 13.83x | 21.55x | 18.45x | 15.90x | 31.84x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 2.35x | 14.31x | 9.63x | 11.15x | 9.28x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.64x | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 8.01x | 10.76x | 11.33x | 13.28x | 10.59x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.23x | 1.89x | 0.54x | 0.52x | 0.59x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.87x | 2.33x | 3.10x | 2.31x | 2.80x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 21.69x | 25.92x | 15.00x | 25.20x | 14.33x |
Profitability & Efficiency
VLO leads this category, winning 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MPC delivers a 19.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $20 in annual profit, vs $11 for XOM. XOM carries lower financial leverage with a 0.16x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MPC's 1.43x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MPC scores 7/9 vs XOM's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +13.9% | +10.7% | +19.6% | +14.1% | +15.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +5.5% | +6.4% | +5.5% | +5.3% | +7.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +11.0% | +8.6% | +8.3% | +5.3% | +9.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +14.4% | +8.9% | +9.3% | +6.0% | +9.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 3 | 7 | 7 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.23x | 0.16x | 1.43x | 0.76x | 0.44x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $18.6B | $32.9B | $30.7B | $21.8B | $7.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $3.2B | $10.7B | $3.7B | $1.1B | $4.7B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $21.8B | $43.5B | $34.4B | $22.9B | $11.7B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 2.54x | 69.44x | 6.36x | 7.65x | 10.63x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — UGP and MPC and VLO each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MPC five years ago would be worth $43,520 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $17,782 for UGP. Over the past 12 months, UGP leads with a +120.4% total return vs XOM's +39.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors VLO at 33.3% vs XOM's 12.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +59.9% | +18.6% | +48.9% | +32.4% | +46.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +120.4% | +39.9% | +65.8% | +61.6% | +101.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +100.1% | +43.0% | +134.9% | +97.1% | +136.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +77.8% | +160.6% | +335.2% | +125.2% | +229.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -24.3% | +102.6% | +671.7% | +166.2% | +406.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +26.0% | +12.7% | +32.9% | +25.4% | +33.3% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — UGP and XOM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
XOM is the less volatile stock with a -0.20 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than UGP's 0.94 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. UGP currently trades 99.3% from its 52-week high vs XOM's 81.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.94x | -0.20x | 0.24x | 0.35x | 0.16x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $6.15 | $176.41 | $261.61 | $190.61 | $258.43 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.80 | $101.19 | $145.28 | $106.34 | $117.71 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +99.3% | +81.8% | +93.6% | +90.0% | +93.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 56.1 | 39.5 | 55.3 | 49.1 | 47.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.9M | 18.9M | 2.5M | 3.0M | 3.8M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — UGP and XOM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: UGP as "Buy", XOM as "Hold", MPC as "Buy", PSX as "Buy", VLO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 11.6% upside for XOM (target: $161) vs -11.6% for UGP (target: $5). For income investors, UGP offers the higher dividend yield at 6.42% vs MPC's 1.53%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $5.40 | $161.08 | $229.63 | $163.38 | $214.67 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 10 | 55 | 33 | 35 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +6.4% | +2.8% | +1.5% | +2.7% | +1.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 2 | 26 | 4 | 13 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.94 | $4.00 | $3.74 | $4.71 | $4.55 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.8% | +3.3% | +4.9% | +1.8% | +3.6% |
XOM leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). UGP leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 3 tied.
UGP vs XOM vs MPC vs PSX vs VLO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is UGP or XOM or MPC or PSX or VLO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Ultrapar Participações S.
A. (UGP) is the stronger pick with 6. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -7. 6% for Phillips 66 (PSX). Ultrapar Participações S. A. (UGP) offers the better valuation at 13. 8x trailing P/E (2. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Ultrapar Participações S. A. (UGP) a "Buy" — based on 10 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 — UGP or XOM or MPC or PSX or VLO?
On trailing P/E, Ultrapar Participações S.
A. (UGP) is the cheapest at 13. 8x versus Valero Energy Corporation at 31. 8x. On forward P/E, Ultrapar Participações S. A. is actually cheaper at 2. 4x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — UGP or XOM or MPC or PSX or VLO?
Over the past 5 years, Marathon Petroleum Corporation (MPC) delivered a total return of +335.
2%, compared to +77. 8% for Ultrapar Participações S. A. (UGP). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MPC returned +671. 7% versus UGP's -24. 3%. 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 — UGP or XOM or MPC or PSX or VLO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Exxon Mobil Corporation (XOM) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus Ultrapar Participações S. A. 's 0. 94β — meaning UGP is approximately -581% more volatile than XOM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Exxon Mobil Corporation (XOM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 16% versus 143% for Marathon Petroleum Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — UGP or XOM or MPC or PSX or VLO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Ultrapar Participações S.
A. (UGP) is pulling ahead at 6. 6% versus -7. 6% for Phillips 66 (PSX). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Phillips 66 grew EPS 116. 2% year-over-year, compared to -14. 5% for Exxon Mobil Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, UGP leads at -0. 3% 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 — UGP or XOM or MPC or PSX or VLO?
Exxon Mobil Corporation (XOM) is the more profitable company, earning 8.
9% net margin versus 1. 7% for Ultrapar Participações S. A. — meaning it keeps 8. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: XOM leads at 10. 5% versus 2. 7% for PSX. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — XOM leads at 21. 7%, 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 UGP or XOM or MPC or PSX or VLO more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Ultrapar Participações S.
A. (UGP) trades at 2. 4x forward P/E versus 14. 3x for Exxon Mobil Corporation — 12. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for XOM: 11. 6% to $161. 08.
08Which pays a better dividend — UGP or XOM or MPC or PSX or VLO?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Ultrapar Participações S. A. (UGP) offers the highest yield at 6. 4%, versus 1. 5% for Marathon Petroleum Corporation (MPC).
09Is UGP or XOM or MPC or PSX or VLO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Exxon Mobil Corporation (XOM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
20), 2. 8% yield, +102. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (XOM: +102. 6%, UGP: -24. 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 UGP and XOM and MPC and PSX and VLO?
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: UGP is a small-cap deep-value stock; XOM is a large-cap quality compounder stock; MPC is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; PSX is a mid-cap deep-value stock; VLO is a mid-cap quality compounder 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.
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.