Regulated Electric
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
IMSR vs XOM vs KO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Oil & Gas Integrated
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
IMSR vs XOM vs KO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Regulated Electric | Oil & Gas Integrated | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $625M | $597.52B | $348.25B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $323.90B | $49.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-46M | $28.84B | $13.70B |
| Gross Margin | — | 21.7% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | — | 10.5% | 29.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | 12.9x | 24.7x |
| Total Debt | $2M | $43.54B | $45.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $97M | $10.68B | $10.27B |
IMSR vs XOM vs KO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Exxon Mobil Corpora… (XOM) | 100 | 315.3 | +215.3% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 181.1 | +81.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: IMSR vs XOM vs KO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
IMSR is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 4.60, Low D/E 0.7%, current ratio 50.62x
- Lower D/E ratio (0.7% vs 132.7%)
XOM has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 43 yrs, beta -0.37, yield 2.8%
- Beta -0.37, yield 2.8%, current ratio 1.15x
- Lower P/E (12.9x vs 24.7x)
KO is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 1.9%, EPS growth 23.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 3.7%
- 118.2% 10Y total return vs XOM's 95.6%
- 1.9% revenue growth vs IMSR's -100.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 1.9% revenue growth vs IMSR's -100.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (12.9x vs 24.7x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs IMSR's -1.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Lower D/E ratio (0.7% vs 132.7%) | |
| Dividends | 2.8% yield, 43-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +29.0% vs IMSR's -66.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs IMSR's -21.0%, ROIC 15.8% vs -18.8% |
IMSR vs XOM vs KO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
IMSR vs XOM vs KO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
XOM and IMSR operate at a comparable scale, with $323.9B and $0 in trailing revenue. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to XOM's 8.9%. On growth, KO holds the edge at +12.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $323.9B | $49.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$38M | $59.9B | $15.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$46M | $28.8B | $13.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$242M | $23.6B | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +21.7% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +10.5% | +29.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | +8.9% | +27.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +7.3% | +25.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -1.3% | +12.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -60.3% | -11.0% | +18.2% |
Valuation Metrics
XOM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 21.0x trailing earnings, XOM trades at a 21% valuation discount to KO's 26.6x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, XOM's 10.5x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than KO's 25.9x.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $625M | $597.5B | $348.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $530M | $630.4B | $383.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -19.38x | 21.04x | 26.62x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 12.86x | 24.75x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 2.38x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 10.52x | 25.89x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 1.84x | 7.26x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.83x | 2.28x | 10.18x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 25.31x | 65.76x |
Profitability & Efficiency
KO leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
KO delivers a 41.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $41 in annual profit, vs $-23 for IMSR. IMSR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to KO's 1.33x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), KO scores 7/9 vs XOM's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -23.4% | +10.7% | +41.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -21.0% | +6.4% | +13.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -18.8% | +8.6% | +15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -16.7% | +8.9% | +17.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 3 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.01x | 0.16x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$95M | $32.9B | $35.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $97M | $10.7B | $10.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2M | $43.5B | $45.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -5.45x | 69.44x | 10.70x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
XOM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in XOM five years ago would be worth $24,852 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,332 for IMSR. Over the past 12 months, XOM leads with a +29.0% total return vs IMSR's -66.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors XOM at 13.0% vs IMSR's -30.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +15.8% | +16.6% | +18.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -66.7% | +29.0% | +17.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -66.7% | +44.3% | +42.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -66.7% | +148.5% | +63.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -66.7% | +95.6% | +118.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -30.7% | +13.0% | +12.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — XOM and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
XOM is the less volatile stock with a -0.37 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than IMSR's 4.60 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. KO currently trades 96.3% from its 52-week high vs IMSR's 27.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 4.60x | -0.37x | -0.20x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $27.16 | $176.41 | $84.04 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $5.33 | $105.53 | $65.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +27.8% | +79.9% | +96.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 45.8 | 43.3 | 60.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 3.0M | 13.7M | 12.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — XOM and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: XOM as "Hold", KO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 78.6% upside for IMSR (target: $14) vs 6.5% for KO (target: $86). For income investors, XOM offers the higher dividend yield at 2.84% vs KO's 2.52%.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $13.50 | $170.08 | $86.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 55 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +2.8% | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 43 | 56 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $4.00 | $2.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +3.4% | +0.2% |
KO leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). XOM leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns). 2 tied.
IMSR vs XOM vs KO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is IMSR or XOM or KO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the stronger pick with 1.
9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -100. 0% for Terrestrial Energy Inc. (IMSR). Exxon Mobil Corporation (XOM) offers the better valuation at 21. 0x trailing P/E (12. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate The Coca-Cola Company (KO) a "Buy" — based on 48 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 — IMSR or XOM or KO?
On trailing P/E, Exxon Mobil Corporation (XOM) is the cheapest at 21.
0x versus The Coca-Cola Company at 26. 6x. On forward P/E, Exxon Mobil Corporation is actually cheaper at 12. 9x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — IMSR or XOM or KO?
Over the past 5 years, Exxon Mobil Corporation (XOM) delivered a total return of +148.
5%, compared to -66. 7% for Terrestrial Energy Inc. (IMSR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: KO returned +118. 2% versus IMSR's -66. 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 — IMSR or XOM or KO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Exxon Mobil Corporation (XOM) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
37β versus Terrestrial Energy Inc. 's 4. 60β — meaning IMSR is approximately -1333% more volatile than XOM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Terrestrial Energy Inc. (IMSR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 133% for The Coca-Cola Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — IMSR or XOM or KO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is pulling ahead at 1.
9% versus -100. 0% for Terrestrial Energy Inc. (IMSR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Coca-Cola Company grew EPS 23. 6% year-over-year, compared to -200. 0% for Terrestrial Energy Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, KO 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 — IMSR or XOM or KO?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus 0. 0% for Terrestrial Energy Inc. — meaning it keeps 27. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: KO leads at 28. 7% versus 0. 0% for IMSR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — KO leads at 61. 6%, 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 IMSR or XOM or KO more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Exxon Mobil Corporation (XOM) trades at 12.
9x forward P/E versus 24. 7x for The Coca-Cola Company — 11. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IMSR: 78. 6% to $13. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — IMSR or XOM or KO?
In this comparison, XOM (2.
8% yield), KO (2. 5% yield) pay a dividend. IMSR does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is IMSR or XOM or KO 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.
37), 2. 8% yield). Terrestrial Energy Inc. (IMSR) carries a higher beta of 4. 60 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (XOM: +95. 6%, IMSR: -66. 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 IMSR and XOM and KO?
These companies operate in different sectors (IMSR (Energy) and XOM (Energy) and KO (Consumer Defensive)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
XOM, KO pay a dividend while IMSR 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.