VIVK vs PARR

For growth investors, Vivakor, Inc.

(VIVK) is the stronger pick with 16. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -6. 4% for Par Pacific Holdings, Inc. (PARR). Par Pacific Holdings, Inc. (PARR) offers the better valuation at 8. 7x trailing P/E (5. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Par Pacific Holdings, Inc. (PARR) a "Buy" — based on 17 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 forward P/E, Par Pacific Holdings, Inc.

is actually cheaper at 5. 6x.

Over the past 5 years, Par Pacific Holdings, Inc.

(PARR) delivered a total return of +325. 5%, compared to -100. 0% for Vivakor, Inc. (VIVK). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PARR returned +255. 3% versus VIVK's -100. 0%. 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), Par Pacific Holdings, Inc.

(PARR) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 01β versus Vivakor, Inc. 's 0. 74β — meaning VIVK is approximately -8421% more volatile than PARR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Par Pacific Holdings, Inc. (PARR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 90% versus 95% for Vivakor, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Vivakor, Inc.

(VIVK) is pulling ahead at 16. 3% versus -6. 4% for Par Pacific Holdings, Inc. (PARR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Par Pacific Holdings, Inc. grew EPS 1314% year-over-year, compared to -109. 2% for Vivakor, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, VIVK leads at 54. 9% 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.

Par Pacific Holdings, Inc.

(PARR) is the more profitable company, earning 4. 9% net margin versus -105. 6% for Vivakor, Inc. — meaning it keeps 4. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: PARR leads at 7. 2% versus -22. 3% for VIVK. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — VIVK leads at 36. 1%, 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, Par Pacific Holdings, Inc.

(PARR) trades at 5. 6x forward P/E versus 64. 1x for Vivakor, Inc. — 58. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis.

In this comparison, VIVK (100.

0% yield) pays a dividend. PARR does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Par Pacific Holdings, Inc.

(PARR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 01), +255. 3% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (PARR: +255. 3%, VIVK: -100. 0%), 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: VIVK is a small-cap high-growth stock; PARR is a small-cap deep-value stock. VIVK pays a dividend while PARR does 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.