PSX Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Marathon Petroleum has a net margin of 0.97% compared to Phillips 66's net margin of 1.77%. Phillips 66's return on equity of 10.89% beat Marathon Petroleum's return on equity of 15.31%.

Phillips 66 has a consensus price target of $140.87, signalling upside risk potential of 21.18%. On the other hand Marathon Petroleum has an analysts' consensus of $168.79 which suggests that it could grow by 18.59%. 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 1.382, which suggesting that the stock is 38.168% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Marathon Petroleum has a beta of 1.420, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 42.022%.

Phillips 66 has a quarterly dividend of $1.15 per share corresponding to a yield of 3.87%. Marathon Petroleum offers a yield of 2.38% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.91 per share. Phillips 66 pays 26.83% of its earnings as a dividend. Marathon Petroleum pays out 13.03% 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 $35.5B, which are larger than Marathon Petroleum quarterly revenues of $35.1B. Phillips 66's net income of $346M is lower than Marathon Petroleum's net income of $622M. Notably, Phillips 66's price-to-earnings ratio is 14.92x while Marathon Petroleum's PE ratio is 11.28x. 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 0.34x versus 0.36x for Marathon Petroleum. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

PBF Energy has a net margin of 0.97% compared to Phillips 66's net margin of -3.41%. Phillips 66's return on equity of 10.89% beat PBF Energy's return on equity of -4.5%.

Phillips 66 has a consensus price target of $140.87, signalling upside risk potential of 21.18%. On the other hand PBF Energy has an analysts' consensus of $30.23 which suggests that it could grow by 11.76%. 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 1.382, which suggesting that the stock is 38.168% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison PBF Energy has a beta of 1.608, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 60.818%.

Phillips 66 has a quarterly dividend of $1.15 per share corresponding to a yield of 3.87%. PBF Energy offers a yield of 3.79% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.28 per share. Phillips 66 pays 26.83% of its earnings as a dividend. PBF Energy pays out 5.19% 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 $35.5B, which are larger than PBF Energy quarterly revenues of $8.4B. Phillips 66's net income of $346M is higher than PBF Energy's net income of -$285.9M. Notably, Phillips 66's price-to-earnings ratio is 14.92x 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 0.34x versus 0.09x for PBF Energy. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Valero Energy has a net margin of 0.97% compared to Phillips 66's net margin of 1.11%. Phillips 66's return on equity of 10.89% beat Valero Energy's return on equity of 13.03%.

Phillips 66 has a consensus price target of $140.87, signalling upside risk potential of 21.18%. On the other hand Valero Energy has an analysts' consensus of $147.60 which suggests that it could grow by 17.9%. 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 1.382, which suggesting that the stock is 38.168% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Valero Energy has a beta of 1.423, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 42.299%.

Phillips 66 has a quarterly dividend of $1.15 per share corresponding to a yield of 3.87%. Valero Energy offers a yield of 3.42% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $1.07 per share. Phillips 66 pays 26.83% of its earnings as a dividend. Valero Energy pays out 16.44% 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 $35.5B, which are larger than Valero Energy quarterly revenues of $32.9B. Phillips 66's net income of $346M is lower than Valero Energy's net income of $364M. Notably, Phillips 66's price-to-earnings ratio is 14.92x while Valero Energy's PE ratio is 11.23x. 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 0.34x versus 0.30x for Valero Energy. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Exxon Mobil has a net margin of 0.97% compared to Phillips 66's net margin of 9.81%. Phillips 66's return on equity of 10.89% beat Exxon Mobil's return on equity of 14.21%.

Phillips 66 has a consensus price target of $140.87, signalling upside risk potential of 21.18%. On the other hand Exxon Mobil has an analysts' consensus of $129.94 which suggests that it could grow by 21.52%. Given that Exxon Mobil has higher upside potential than Phillips 66, analysts believe Exxon Mobil is more attractive than Phillips 66.

Phillips 66 has a beta of 1.382, which suggesting that the stock is 38.168% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Exxon Mobil has a beta of 0.907, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 9.284%.

Phillips 66 has a quarterly dividend of $1.15 per share corresponding to a yield of 3.87%. Exxon Mobil offers a yield of 3.59% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.99 per share. Phillips 66 pays 26.83% of its earnings as a dividend. Exxon Mobil pays out 41.49% 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 $35.5B, which are smaller than Exxon Mobil quarterly revenues of $87.8B. Phillips 66's net income of $346M is lower than Exxon Mobil's net income of $8.6B. Notably, Phillips 66's price-to-earnings ratio is 14.92x while Exxon Mobil's PE ratio is 13.32x. 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 0.34x versus 1.32x for Exxon Mobil. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.