PSX Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

CVR Energy has a net margin of 1.6% compared to Phillips 66's net margin of -7.47%. Phillips 66's return on equity of 6.28% beat CVR Energy's return on equity of -21.31%.

Phillips 66 has a consensus price target of $134.92, signalling upside risk potential of 9.1%. On the other hand CVR Energy has an analysts' consensus of $24.00 which suggests that it could fall by -17.07%. Given that Phillips 66 has higher upside potential than CVR Energy, analysts believe Phillips 66 is more attractive than CVR Energy.

Phillips 66 has a beta of 1.021, which suggesting that the stock is 2.127% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison CVR Energy has a beta of 1.222, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 22.211%.

Phillips 66 has a quarterly dividend of $1.20 per share corresponding to a yield of 3.76%. CVR Energy offers a yield of 9.54% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $2.26 per share. Phillips 66 pays 88.9% of its earnings as a dividend. CVR Energy pays out 2157.14% of its earnings as a dividend. Phillips 66's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future, but CVR Energy's is not.

Phillips 66 quarterly revenues are $30.4B, which are larger than CVR Energy quarterly revenues of $1.6B. Phillips 66's net income of $487M is higher than CVR Energy's net income of -$123M. Notably, Phillips 66's price-to-earnings ratio is 28.17x while CVR Energy's PE ratio is 324.67x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Phillips 66 is 0.37x versus 0.39x for CVR Energy. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Marathon Petroleum has a net margin of 1.6% compared to Phillips 66's net margin of -0.24%. Phillips 66's return on equity of 6.28% beat Marathon Petroleum's return on equity of 9.28%.

Phillips 66 has a consensus price target of $134.92, signalling upside risk potential of 9.1%. On the other hand Marathon Petroleum has an analysts' consensus of $179.60 which suggests that it could grow by 4.2%. Given that Phillips 66 has higher upside potential than Marathon Petroleum, analysts believe Phillips 66 is more attractive than Marathon Petroleum.

Phillips 66 has a beta of 1.021, which suggesting that the stock is 2.127% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Marathon Petroleum has a beta of 0.882, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 11.787%.

Phillips 66 has a quarterly dividend of $1.20 per share corresponding to a yield of 3.76%. Marathon Petroleum offers a yield of 2.06% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.91 per share. Phillips 66 pays 88.9% of its earnings as a dividend. Marathon Petroleum pays out 33.5% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Phillips 66 quarterly revenues are $30.4B, which are smaller than Marathon Petroleum quarterly revenues of $31.5B. Phillips 66's net income of $487M is higher than Marathon Petroleum's net income of -$74M. Notably, Phillips 66's price-to-earnings ratio is 28.17x while Marathon Petroleum's PE ratio is 24.24x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Phillips 66 is 0.37x versus 0.41x for Marathon Petroleum. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

PBF Energy has a net margin of 1.6% compared to Phillips 66's net margin of -5.69%. Phillips 66's return on equity of 6.28% beat PBF Energy's return on equity of -17.4%.

Phillips 66 has a consensus price target of $134.92, signalling upside risk potential of 9.1%. On the other hand PBF Energy has an analysts' consensus of $21.38 which suggests that it could fall by -14.39%. Given that Phillips 66 has higher upside potential than PBF Energy, analysts believe Phillips 66 is more attractive than PBF Energy.

Phillips 66 has a beta of 1.021, which suggesting that the stock is 2.127% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison PBF Energy has a beta of 0.843, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 15.656%.

Phillips 66 has a quarterly dividend of $1.20 per share corresponding to a yield of 3.76%. PBF Energy offers a yield of 4.3% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.28 per share. Phillips 66 pays 88.9% of its earnings as a dividend. PBF Energy pays out -22.59% of its earnings as a dividend. Phillips 66's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Phillips 66 quarterly revenues are $30.4B, which are larger than PBF Energy quarterly revenues of $7.1B. Phillips 66's net income of $487M is higher than PBF Energy's net income of -$401.8M. Notably, Phillips 66's price-to-earnings ratio is 28.17x while PBF Energy's PE ratio is 5.67x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Phillips 66 is 0.37x versus 0.09x for PBF Energy. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Valero Energy has a net margin of 1.6% compared to Phillips 66's net margin of -1.97%. Phillips 66's return on equity of 6.28% beat Valero Energy's return on equity of 3.35%.

Phillips 66 has a consensus price target of $134.92, signalling upside risk potential of 9.1%. On the other hand Valero Energy has an analysts' consensus of $152.97 which suggests that it could grow by 6.83%. Given that Phillips 66 has higher upside potential than Valero Energy, analysts believe Phillips 66 is more attractive than Valero Energy.

Phillips 66 has a beta of 1.021, which suggesting that the stock is 2.127% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Valero Energy has a beta of 0.997, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 0.281%.

Phillips 66 has a quarterly dividend of $1.20 per share corresponding to a yield of 3.76%. Valero Energy offers a yield of 3.07% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $1.13 per share. Phillips 66 pays 88.9% of its earnings as a dividend. Valero Energy pays out 49.96% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

Phillips 66 quarterly revenues are $30.4B, which are larger than Valero Energy quarterly revenues of $30.3B. Phillips 66's net income of $487M is higher than Valero Energy's net income of -$595M. Notably, Phillips 66's price-to-earnings ratio is 28.17x while Valero Energy's PE ratio is 50.60x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Phillips 66 is 0.37x versus 0.35x for Valero Energy. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.