Seek Returns logo

CMS vs. ED: A Head-to-Head Stock Comparison

Updated on

Here’s a clear look at CMS and ED, comparing key factors like historical performance, profitability, financial strength, growth, dividend, and valuation.

Company Profile

SymbolCMSED
Company NameCMS Energy CorporationConsolidated Edison, Inc.
CountryUnited StatesUnited States
GICS SectorUtilitiesUtilities
GICS IndustryMulti-UtilitiesMulti-Utilities
Market Capitalization21.66 billion USD35.93 billion USD
ExchangeNYSENYSE
Listing DateFebruary 21, 1973January 2, 1962
Security TypeCommon StockCommon Stock

Historical Performance

This chart compares the performance of CMS and ED by tracking the growth of an initial $10,000 investment in each. Use the tabs to select the desired time period. Data is adjusted for dividends and splits.

CMS vs. ED: Growth of a $10,000 investment over the past one year.

Historical Performance at a Glance

SymbolCMSED
5-Day Price Return1.96%1.73%
13-Week Price Return3.19%0.17%
26-Week Price Return-1.07%-6.46%
52-Week Price Return2.46%-3.39%
Month-to-Date Return-1.21%2.33%
Year-to-Date Return8.58%12.65%
10-Day Avg. Volume2.72M2.14M
3-Month Avg. Volume2.30M2.50M
3-Month Volatility14.51%14.29%
Beta0.480.32

Profitability

Return on Equity (TTM)

CMS

12.37%

Multi-Utilities Industry

Max
20.00%
Q3
13.79%
Median
9.45%
Q1
7.88%
Min
4.56%

CMS’s Return on Equity of 12.37% is on par with the norm for the Multi-Utilities industry, indicating its profitability relative to shareholder equity is typical for the sector.

ED

8.47%

Multi-Utilities Industry

Max
20.00%
Q3
13.79%
Median
9.45%
Q1
7.88%
Min
4.56%

ED’s Return on Equity of 8.47% is on par with the norm for the Multi-Utilities industry, indicating its profitability relative to shareholder equity is typical for the sector.

CMS vs. ED: A comparison of their Return on Equity (TTM) against the Multi-Utilities industry benchmark.

Net Profit Margin (TTM)

CMS

13.35%

Multi-Utilities Industry

Max
23.49%
Q3
14.79%
Median
9.24%
Q1
4.19%
Min
-1.05%

CMS’s Net Profit Margin of 13.35% is aligned with the median group of its peers in the Multi-Utilities industry. This indicates its ability to convert revenue into profit is typical for the sector.

ED

11.98%

Multi-Utilities Industry

Max
23.49%
Q3
14.79%
Median
9.24%
Q1
4.19%
Min
-1.05%

ED’s Net Profit Margin of 11.98% is aligned with the median group of its peers in the Multi-Utilities industry. This indicates its ability to convert revenue into profit is typical for the sector.

CMS vs. ED: A comparison of their Net Profit Margin (TTM) against the Multi-Utilities industry benchmark.

Operating Profit Margin (TTM)

CMS

22.35%

Multi-Utilities Industry

Max
45.01%
Q3
26.69%
Median
19.18%
Q1
7.66%
Min
-0.18%

CMS’s Operating Profit Margin of 22.35% is around the midpoint for the Multi-Utilities industry, indicating that its efficiency in managing core business operations is typical for the sector.

ED

17.45%

Multi-Utilities Industry

Max
45.01%
Q3
26.69%
Median
19.18%
Q1
7.66%
Min
-0.18%

ED’s Operating Profit Margin of 17.45% is around the midpoint for the Multi-Utilities industry, indicating that its efficiency in managing core business operations is typical for the sector.

CMS vs. ED: A comparison of their Operating Profit Margin (TTM) against the Multi-Utilities industry benchmark.

Profitability at a Glance

SymbolCMSED
Return on Equity (TTM)12.37%8.47%
Return on Assets (TTM)2.83%2.75%
Net Profit Margin (TTM)13.35%11.98%
Operating Profit Margin (TTM)22.35%17.45%
Gross Profit Margin (TTM)31.86%46.69%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

CMS

1.00

Multi-Utilities Industry

Max
1.35
Q3
1.10
Median
0.95
Q1
0.82
Min
0.48

CMS’s Current Ratio of 1.00 aligns with the median group of the Multi-Utilities industry, indicating that its short-term liquidity is in line with its sector peers.

ED

1.10

Multi-Utilities Industry

Max
1.35
Q3
1.10
Median
0.95
Q1
0.82
Min
0.48

ED’s Current Ratio of 1.10 is in the upper quartile for the Multi-Utilities industry. This signifies a strong liquidity position, suggesting the company is well-equipped to cover its immediate liabilities compared to its peers.

CMS vs. ED: A comparison of their Current Ratio (MRQ) against the Multi-Utilities industry benchmark.

Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)

CMS

2.15

Multi-Utilities Industry

Max
3.03
Q3
2.00
Median
1.55
Q1
1.24
Min
0.58

CMS’s leverage is in the upper quartile of the Multi-Utilities industry, with a Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 2.15. While this approach can boost equity growth, it also exposes the company to greater financial vulnerability.

ED

1.12

Multi-Utilities Industry

Max
3.03
Q3
2.00
Median
1.55
Q1
1.24
Min
0.58

Falling into the lower quartile for the Multi-Utilities industry, ED’s Debt-to-Equity Ratio of 1.12 points to a conservative financing strategy. This results in lower financial risk but potentially limits strategic investments compared to more leveraged competitors.

CMS vs. ED: A comparison of their Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ) against the Multi-Utilities industry benchmark.

Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)

CMS

2.73

Multi-Utilities Industry

Max
9.98
Q3
5.96
Median
3.48
Q1
2.74
Min
0.59

In the lower quartile for the Multi-Utilities industry, CMS’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 2.73 indicates a tighter cushion for servicing debt, suggesting less financial flexibility than many of its competitors.

ED

3.23

Multi-Utilities Industry

Max
9.98
Q3
5.96
Median
3.48
Q1
2.74
Min
0.59

ED’s Interest Coverage Ratio of 3.23 is positioned comfortably within the norm for the Multi-Utilities industry, indicating a standard and healthy capacity to cover its interest payments.

CMS vs. ED: A comparison of their Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM) against the Multi-Utilities industry benchmark.

Financial Strength at a Glance

SymbolCMSED
Current Ratio (MRQ)1.001.10
Quick Ratio (MRQ)0.730.94
Debt-to-Equity Ratio (MRQ)2.151.12
Interest Coverage Ratio (TTM)2.733.23

Growth

Revenue Growth

CMS vs. ED: A side-by-side comparison of their Revenue Growth for the MRQ (YoY), TTM (YoY), 3-Year CAGR, and 5-Year CAGR periods.

EPS Growth

CMS vs. ED: A side-by-side comparison of their EPS Growth for the MRQ (YoY), TTM (YoY), 3-Year CAGR, and 5-Year CAGR periods.

Dividend

Dividend Yield (TTM)

CMS

3.34%

Multi-Utilities Industry

Max
10.02%
Q3
5.84%
Median
4.22%
Q1
2.96%
Min
0.00%

CMS’s Dividend Yield of 3.34% is consistent with its peers in the Multi-Utilities industry, providing a dividend return that is standard for its sector.

ED

3.15%

Multi-Utilities Industry

Max
10.02%
Q3
5.84%
Median
4.22%
Q1
2.96%
Min
0.00%

ED’s Dividend Yield of 3.15% is consistent with its peers in the Multi-Utilities industry, providing a dividend return that is standard for its sector.

CMS vs. ED: A comparison of their Dividend Yield (TTM) against the Multi-Utilities industry benchmark.

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

CMS

71.26%

Multi-Utilities Industry

Max
161.38%
Q3
101.19%
Median
73.21%
Q1
58.41%
Min
31.93%

CMS’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 71.26% is within the typical range for the Multi-Utilities industry, suggesting a balanced approach between shareholder payouts and company reinvestment.

ED

58.24%

Multi-Utilities Industry

Max
161.38%
Q3
101.19%
Median
73.21%
Q1
58.41%
Min
31.93%

ED’s Dividend Payout Ratio of 58.24% is in the lower quartile for the Multi-Utilities industry. This suggests a conservative dividend policy, with a strategic focus on reinvesting profits for future growth.

CMS vs. ED: A comparison of their Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM) against the Multi-Utilities industry benchmark.

Dividend at a Glance

SymbolCMSED
Dividend Yield (TTM)3.34%3.15%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)71.26%58.24%

Valuation

Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)

CMS

21.35

Multi-Utilities Industry

Max
27.93
Q3
20.57
Median
15.98
Q1
9.34
Min
5.25

A P/E Ratio of 21.35 places CMS in the upper quartile for the Multi-Utilities industry. This high valuation relative to peers suggests the market holds elevated expectations for the company’s future growth.

ED

18.48

Multi-Utilities Industry

Max
27.93
Q3
20.57
Median
15.98
Q1
9.34
Min
5.25

ED’s P/E Ratio of 18.48 is within the middle range for the Multi-Utilities industry. This suggests its valuation is in line with the sector average, representing neither a significant premium nor a discount compared to its peers.

CMS vs. ED: A comparison of their Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM) against the Multi-Utilities industry benchmark.

Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)

CMS

2.85

Multi-Utilities Industry

Max
5.00
Q3
3.46
Median
1.80
Q1
0.46
Min
0.26

CMS’s P/S Ratio of 2.85 aligns with the market consensus for the Multi-Utilities industry. This suggests its valuation, based on sales, is seen as standard and is on par with its competitors.

ED

2.21

Multi-Utilities Industry

Max
5.00
Q3
3.46
Median
1.80
Q1
0.46
Min
0.26

ED’s P/S Ratio of 2.21 aligns with the market consensus for the Multi-Utilities industry. This suggests its valuation, based on sales, is seen as standard and is on par with its competitors.

CMS vs. ED: A comparison of their Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM) against the Multi-Utilities industry benchmark.

Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)

CMS

2.47

Multi-Utilities Industry

Max
2.52
Q3
2.12
Median
1.55
Q1
1.25
Min
0.91

CMS’s P/B Ratio of 2.47 is in the upper tier for the Multi-Utilities industry. This indicates that investors are paying a premium relative to the company’s net assets, a valuation that hinges on its ability to generate superior profits.

ED

1.52

Multi-Utilities Industry

Max
2.52
Q3
2.12
Median
1.55
Q1
1.25
Min
0.91

ED’s P/B Ratio of 1.52 is within the conventional range for the Multi-Utilities industry. This shows a balanced market view, where the stock’s price is neither at a significant premium nor a discount to the book value of its peers.

CMS vs. ED: A comparison of their Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ) against the Multi-Utilities industry benchmark.

Valuation at a Glance

SymbolCMSED
Price-to-Earnings Ratio (TTM)21.3518.48
Price-to-Sales Ratio (TTM)2.852.21
Price-to-Book Ratio (MRQ)2.471.52
Price-to-Free Cash Flow Ratio (TTM)158.2645.56