VET
Vermilion Energy Inc.
Oil & Gas Exploration & Production
Market Cap$1.71B
5Y Perf.+150.0%
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisVET
CNQ
Try popular comparisons:
Stock Comparison
VET vs CNQ
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
CNQ
Canadian Natural Resources Limited
Oil & Gas Exploration & Production
Market Cap$94.49B
5Y Perf.+419.5%
VET vs CNQ — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot |  VET |  CNQ |
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Oil & Gas Exploration & Production | Oil & Gas Exploration & Production |
| Market Cap | $1.71B | $94.49B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.81B | $40.74B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-814M | $9.71B |
| Gross Margin | 35.9% | 30.8% |
| Operating Margin | 20.2% | 26.8% |
| Forward P/E | 11.2x | 7.5x |
| Total Debt | $1.30B | $19.71B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $19M | $672M |
VET vs CNQ — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
VET
CNQ
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vermilion Energy In… (VET) | 100 | 250.0 | +150.0% |
| Canadian Natural Re… (CNQ) | 100 | 519.5 | +419.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: VET vs CNQ
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Bottom line: CNQ leads in 5 of 7 categories, making it the strongest pick for growth and revenue expansion and valuation and capital efficiency. Vermilion Energy Inc. is the stronger pick specifically for dividend income and shareholder returns and recent price momentum and sentiment. As sector peers, any of these can serve as alternatives in the same allocation.
🥇CNQ emerged as the overall leader. Track its performance:
VET
Vermilion Energy Inc.
The Income Pick
VET is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 3 yrs, beta -0.18, yield 4.1%
- Beta -0.18, yield 4.1%, current ratio 0.84x
- 4.1% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs CNQ's 3.7%
Best for: income & stability and defensive
CNQ
Canadian Natural Resources Limited
The Growth Play
CNQ carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 23.9%, EPS growth 81.1%, 3Y rev CAGR -3.7%
- 286.3% 10Y total return vs VET's -39.7%
- Lower volatility, beta -0.15, Low D/E 44.5%, current ratio 0.95x
Best for: growth exposure and long-term compounding
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth |  CNQ | 23.9% revenue growth vs VET's -15.0% |
| Value | CNQ | Lower P/E (7.5x vs 11.2x) |
| Quality / Margins | CNQ | 23.8% margin vs VET's -44.9% |
| Stability / Safety | CNQ | Lower D/E ratio (44.5% vs 58.6%) |
| Dividends |  VET | 4.1% yield, 3-year raise streak, vs CNQ's 3.7% |
| Momentum (1Y) | VET | +45.6% vs CNQ's +42.0% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | CNQ | 11.8% ROA vs VET's -13.8%, ROIC 10.0% vs 3.5% |
VET vs CNQ — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
FY 2025
VET vs CNQ — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
BEST OVERALLCNQLAGGINGVET
VETVermilion Energy Inc.
1leads
CNQCanadian Natural Reso…
3leads
6 Total Categories
CATEGORYLEADERvs VETMETRICS WON
Income & Cash FlowRevenue, margins, and cash flow strength
CNQ4/6
Valuation MetricsMultiples, price ratios, and targets
VET5/6
Profitability & EfficiencyROE, ROIC, leverage, and quality scores
CNQ7/9
Total Returns1Y, 3Y, 5Y total returns with dividends
CNQ5/6
Risk & VolatilityBeta, volatility, and downside exposure
Tied
—
Analyst OutlookRatings, price targets, and dividends
Tied
—
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CNQ leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CNQ is the larger business by revenue, generating $40.7B annually — 22.5x VET's $1.8B. CNQ is the more profitable business, keeping 23.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to VET's -44.9%.
| Metric | VETVermilion Energy … | CNQCanadian Natural … |
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.8B | $40.7B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $1.2B | $20.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$814M | $9.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $301M | $6.2B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +35.9% | +30.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +20.2% | +26.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -44.9% | +23.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +16.6% | +15.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -16.4% | -14.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -10.9% | -45.3% |
CNQ leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
VET leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, VET's 3.9x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than CNQ's 9.5x.
| Metric | VETVermilion Energy … | CNQCanadian Natural … |
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.7B | $94.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.6B | $108.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -3.68x | 12.27x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 11.20x | 7.47x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 3.92x | 9.55x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.35x | 2.99x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.08x | 3.00x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 7.32x | 15.69x |
VET leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CNQ leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CNQ delivers a 24.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $25 in annual profit, vs $-34 for VET. CNQ carries lower financial leverage with a 0.44x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to VET's 0.59x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CNQ scores 8/9 vs VET's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | VETVermilion Energy … | CNQCanadian Natural … |
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -33.7% | +24.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -13.8% | +11.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +3.5% | +10.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +3.3% | +10.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.59x | 0.44x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.3B | $19.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $19M | $672M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.3B | $19.7B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 2.53x | 14.97x |
CNQ leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CNQ leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CNQ five years ago would be worth $28,114 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $14,136 for VET. Over the past 12 months, VET leads with a +45.6% total return vs CNQ's +42.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CNQ at 22.1% vs VET's 1.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | VETVermilion Energy … | CNQCanadian Natural … |
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +31.7% | +33.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +45.6% | +42.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +4.0% | +81.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +41.4% | +181.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -39.7% | +286.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +1.3% | +22.1% |
CNQ leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — VET and CNQ each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
VET is the less volatile stock with a -0.18 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CNQ's -0.15 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CNQ currently trades 88.2% from its 52-week high vs VET's 75.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | VETVermilion Energy … | CNQCanadian Natural … |
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.18x | -0.15x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $14.82 | $51.34 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $7.00 | $29.30 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +75.2% | +88.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 40.9 | 44.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.3M | 7.8M |
Evenly matched — VET and CNQ each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — VET and CNQ each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates VET as "Hold" and CNQ as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply -3.7% upside for VET (target: $11) vs -22.7% for CNQ (target: $35). For income investors, VET offers the higher dividend yield at 4.10% vs CNQ's 3.66%.
| Metric | VETVermilion Energy … | CNQCanadian Natural … |
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $10.74 | $35.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 10 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +4.1% | +3.7% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 3 | 10 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.64 | $2.32 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.5% | +1.1% |
Evenly matched — VET and CNQ each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Key Takeaway
CNQ leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). VET leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
Best OverallCanadian Natural Resources … (CNQ)Leads 3 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...
VET vs CNQ: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is VET or CNQ a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ) is the stronger pick with 23.
9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -15. 0% for Vermilion Energy Inc. (VET). Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ) offers the better valuation at 12. 3x trailing P/E (7. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ) a "Buy" — based on 37 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 — VET or CNQ?
On forward P/E, Canadian Natural Resources Limited is actually cheaper at 7.
5x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — VET or CNQ?
Over the past 5 years, Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ) delivered a total return of +181.
1%, compared to +41. 4% for Vermilion Energy Inc. (VET). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CNQ returned +286. 3% versus VET's -39. 7%. 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 — VET or CNQ?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Vermilion Energy Inc.
(VET) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 18β versus Canadian Natural Resources Limited's -0. 15β — meaning CNQ is approximately -16% more volatile than VET relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 44% versus 59% for Vermilion Energy Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — VET or CNQ?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ) is pulling ahead at 23.
9% versus -15. 0% for Vermilion Energy Inc. (VET). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Canadian Natural Resources Limited grew EPS 81. 1% year-over-year, compared to -1313. 3% for Vermilion Energy Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CNQ leads at -3. 7% 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 — VET or CNQ?
Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ) is the more profitable company, earning 24.
5% net margin versus -37. 0% for Vermilion Energy Inc. — meaning it keeps 24. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CNQ leads at 18. 6% versus 9. 5% for VET. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CNQ leads at 21. 3%, 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 VET or CNQ more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ) trades at 7.
5x forward P/E versus 11. 2x for Vermilion Energy Inc. — 3. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for VET: -3. 7% to $10. 74.
08Which pays a better dividend — VET or CNQ?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Vermilion Energy Inc. (VET) offers the highest yield at 4. 1%, versus 3. 7% for Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ).
09Is VET or CNQ better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
15), 3. 7% yield, +286. 3% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CNQ: +286. 3%, VET: -39. 7%), 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 VET and CNQ?
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: VET is a small-cap income-oriented stock; CNQ 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.