Seek Returns

COP vs. FANG: ConocoPhillips vs. Diamondback Energy Stock Comparison

How do ConocoPhillips (COP) and Diamondback Energy (FANG) stack up? This page sets them side by side across company profile, performance and risk, profitability, growth, financial strength, dividends, and valuation, with selected fundamentals also measured against each stock's industry-group peers.

Company Profile

ConocoPhillips (COP) and Diamondback Energy (FANG) are both classified in the Oil & Gas Exploration & Production sub-industry within the broader Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels industry, placing them in the closest GICS peer bucket.

Company profile comparison for ConocoPhillips (COP) and Diamondback Energy (FANG)
Profile ItemCOPFANG
NameConocoPhillipsDiamondback Energy Inc.
Country/RegionUnited StatesUnited States
GICS SectorEnergyEnergy
GICS Industry GroupEnergyEnergy
GICS IndustryOil, Gas & Consumable FuelsOil, Gas & Consumable Fuels
GICS Sub-IndustryOil & Gas Exploration & ProductionOil & Gas Exploration & Production
Market Capitalization161.12 billion USD49.96 billion USD
CurrencyUSDUSD
ExchangeNYSENasdaq
Listing DateDecember 31, 1981October 12, 2012
Security TypeCommon StockCommon Stock

Price Performance

Cumulative Growth

COP
FANG
GSPC
Loading price history…
ConocoPhillips (COP) vs. Diamondback Energy (FANG), with S&P 500 (GSPC) for reference: Growth of a $10,000 investment over the past five years. Adjusted for dividends and splits.

Trailing Returns

Loading price history…
Trailing total returns for ConocoPhillips (COP) and Diamondback Energy (FANG). Returns over one year are annualized.

Calendar-Year Returns

Loading price history…
Calendar-year total returns for ConocoPhillips (COP) and Diamondback Energy (FANG). Each bar is that year's total return, measured year-end to year-end.

Performance Metrics

Price performance metrics for ConocoPhillips (COP) and Diamondback Energy (FANG)
MetricCOPFANG
Total Return (1Y)62.02%26.99%
Total Return (3Y, Annualized)9.29%8.52%
Total Return (5Y, Annualized)16.40%14.17%

Risk Profile

Drawdown History

COP
FANG
GSPC
Loading price history…
ConocoPhillips (COP) vs. Diamondback Energy (FANG), with S&P 500 (GSPC) for reference: Drawdown from the running peak over the past five years. Each line shows the decline from its prior peak; 0% marks a new high.

Return Distribution

Loading price history…
Distribution of monthly total returns for ConocoPhillips (COP) and Diamondback Energy (FANG). Each bar is the share of months whose return fell in that 5% bucket.

Risk Metrics

Risk profile metrics for ConocoPhillips (COP) and Diamondback Energy (FANG)
MetricCOPFANG
Volatility (1Y, Annualized)31.63%33.77%
Beta (5Y)0.190.53
Max Drawdown (5Y)-36.30%-42.10%
Avg. Volume (3M)6.60M2.38M

Risk-Adjusted Performance

Risk-Return Positioning

Loading chart…
COP and FANG are plotted by 1-year volatility (risk) and 1-year return. The dashed Capital Allocation Line runs from the risk-free rate through the shared industry median.

Risk-Adjusted Metrics

Risk-adjusted metrics for ConocoPhillips (COP) and Diamondback Energy (FANG)
MetricCOPFANG
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)1.830.67
Sortino Ratio (1Y)2.700.97

Profitability

ROE (TTM)

Both ConocoPhillips (COP) at 17.66% and Diamondback Energy (FANG) at 4.86% land near their industries’ usual ROE ranges, so capital efficiency looks broadly in line with peers on both sides.

COP

Energy industry group

17.66%

Max
53.85%
Q3
24.79%
COP
17.66%
Median
12.85%
Q1
2.03%
Min
-29.09%

FANG

Energy industry group

4.86%

Max
53.85%
Q3
24.79%
Median
12.85%
FANG
4.86%
Q1
2.03%
Min
-29.09%
Loading chart…
ConocoPhillips (COP) vs. Diamondback Energy (FANG): A comparison of their ROE against the Energy industry group benchmark.

Net Margin (TTM)

Both ConocoPhillips (COP) at 16.76% and Diamondback Energy (FANG) at 11.62% keep about the typical share of revenue as profit for their industries — neither bottom line stands out from peers.

COP

Energy industry group

16.76%

Max
56.92%
Q3
22.92%
COP
16.76%
Median
10.10%
Q1
0.07%
Min
-27.38%

FANG

Energy industry group

11.62%

Max
56.92%
Q3
22.92%
FANG
11.62%
Median
10.10%
Q1
0.07%
Min
-27.38%
Loading chart…
ConocoPhillips (COP) vs. Diamondback Energy (FANG): A comparison of their net margin against the Energy industry group benchmark.

Operating Margin (TTM)

Diamondback Energy (FANG) at 44.95% operates in the top operating margin quartile, ahead of ConocoPhillips (COP) at 30.05%, which runs around its industry’s norm.

COP

Energy industry group

30.05%

Max
71.31%
Q3
33.75%
COP
30.05%
Median
18.73%
Q1
6.94%
Min
-24.52%

FANG

Energy industry group

44.95%

Max
71.31%
FANG
44.95%
Q3
33.75%
Median
18.73%
Q1
6.94%
Min
-24.52%
Loading chart…
ConocoPhillips (COP) vs. Diamondback Energy (FANG): A comparison of their operating margin against the Energy industry group benchmark.

Profitability Metrics

Profitability metrics for ConocoPhillips (COP) and Diamondback Energy (FANG)
MetricCOPFANG
ROE (TTM)17.66%4.86%
ROA (TTM)8.98%2.07%
Net Margin (TTM)16.76%11.62%
Operating Margin (TTM)30.05%44.95%
Gross Margin (TTM)49.01%73.62%

Growth

Revenue Growth

Diamondback Energy (FANG) at 35.44% sits in the top revenue growth quartile, while ConocoPhillips (COP) at 7.67% is closer to the peer norm — faster top-line expansion for FANG.

Loading chart…
ConocoPhillips (COP) vs. Diamondback Energy (FANG): A comparison of their Revenue Growth across different time periods.

EPS Growth

ConocoPhillips (COP) at -18.69% is around its peer norm for EPS growth, while Diamondback Energy (FANG) at -63.10% drops into the bottom quartile, signaling weaker earnings momentum.

Loading chart…
ConocoPhillips (COP) vs. Diamondback Energy (FANG): A comparison of their EPS Growth across different time periods.

Growth Metrics

Growth metrics for ConocoPhillips (COP) and Diamondback Energy (FANG)
MetricCOPFANG
Revenue Growth (YoY)7.67%35.44%
Revenue Growth (3Y CAGR)-9.11%15.99%
EPS Growth (YoY)-18.69%-63.10%
EPS Growth (3Y CAGR)-24.18%-38.48%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

ConocoPhillips (COP) at 1.52 keeps current ratio within its industry’s typical mid-range, while Diamondback Energy (FANG) at 0.55 runs in the tighter-liquidity quartile — a thinner cushion against current liabilities for FANG.

COP

Energy industry group

1.52

Max
3.64
Q3
2.21
COP
1.52
Median
1.41
Q1
0.88
Min
0.24

FANG

Energy industry group

0.55

Max
3.64
Q3
2.21
Median
1.41
Q1
0.88
FANG
0.55
Min
0.24
Loading chart…
ConocoPhillips (COP) vs. Diamondback Energy (FANG): A comparison of their current ratio against the Energy industry group benchmark.

Debt / Equity (MRQ)

Diamondback Energy (FANG) at 0.29 keeps leverage in the lower industry quartile, while ConocoPhillips (COP) at 0.35 runs a more typical debt-to-equity mix.

COP

Energy industry group

0.35

Max
1.75
Q3
0.93
Median
0.54
COP
0.35
Q1
0.30
Min
0.00

FANG

Energy industry group

0.29

Max
1.75
Q3
0.93
Median
0.54
Q1
0.30
FANG
0.29
Min
0.00
Loading chart…
ConocoPhillips (COP) vs. Diamondback Energy (FANG): A comparison of their debt-to-equity ratio against the Energy industry group benchmark.

Financial Strength Metrics

Financial strength metrics for ConocoPhillips (COP) and Diamondback Energy (FANG)
MetricCOPFANG
Current Ratio (MRQ)1.520.55
Debt / Equity (MRQ)0.350.29
Net Debt / EBITDA0.450.99

Dividends

Dividend Yield (TTM)

Both ConocoPhillips (COP) at 2.48% and Diamondback Energy (FANG) at 2.47% pay solid, industry-typical yields, sitting squarely within their peers’ usual range.

COP

Energy industry group

2.48%

Max
8.57%
Q3
3.58%
COP
2.48%
Median
1.71%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%

FANG

Energy industry group

2.47%

Max
8.57%
Q3
3.58%
FANG
2.47%
Median
1.71%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%
Loading chart…
ConocoPhillips (COP) vs. Diamondback Energy (FANG): A comparison of their dividend yield against the Energy industry group benchmark.

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

ConocoPhillips (COP) at 35.41% pays out a band-typical share of earnings, while Diamondback Energy (FANG) at 57.20% distributes more than its industry norm — less retained, thinner cover.

COP

Energy industry group

35.41%

Max
133.24%
Q3
53.31%
COP
35.41%
Median
25.24%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%

FANG

Energy industry group

57.20%

Max
133.24%
FANG
57.20%
Q3
53.31%
Median
25.24%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%
Loading chart…
ConocoPhillips (COP) vs. Diamondback Energy (FANG): A comparison of their payout ratio against the Energy industry group benchmark.

Dividend Metrics

Dividend metrics for ConocoPhillips (COP) and Diamondback Energy (FANG)
MetricCOPFANG
Dividend Yield (TTM)2.48%2.47%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)35.41%57.20%

Valuation

P/E Ratio (TTM)

ConocoPhillips (COP) at 14.36 is near its industry’s usual P/E ratio, while Diamondback Energy (FANG) at 24.09 sits in the richer quartile — FANG needs stronger growth or earnings quality to justify the premium.

COP

Energy industry group

14.36

Max
39.54
Q3
21.72
COP
14.36
Median
12.19
Q1
7.71
Min
2.99

FANG

Energy industry group

24.09

Max
39.54
FANG
24.09
Q3
21.72
Median
12.19
Q1
7.71
Min
2.99
Loading chart…
ConocoPhillips (COP) vs. Diamondback Energy (FANG): A comparison of their P/E ratio against the Energy industry group benchmark.

P/S Ratio (TTM)

On P/S ratio, both ConocoPhillips (COP) at 2.34 and Diamondback Energy (FANG) at 2.83 are priced roughly in line with their industries — neither looks cheap nor rich on a sales basis.

COP

Energy industry group

2.34

Max
5.40
Q3
2.85
COP
2.34
Median
1.69
Q1
0.88
Min
0.00

FANG

Energy industry group

2.83

Max
5.40
Q3
2.85
FANG
2.83
Median
1.69
Q1
0.88
Min
0.00
Loading chart…
ConocoPhillips (COP) vs. Diamondback Energy (FANG): A comparison of their P/S ratio against the Energy industry group benchmark.

P/B Ratio (MRQ)

Diamondback Energy (FANG) at 1.28 is valued about in line with its industry on P/B ratio, while ConocoPhillips (COP) at 2.44 carries an above-peer premium to book — COP is pricier on assets.

COP

Energy industry group

2.44

Max
4.21
COP
2.44
Q3
2.38
Median
1.51
Q1
1.08
Min
0.01

FANG

Energy industry group

1.28

Max
4.21
Q3
2.38
Median
1.51
FANG
1.28
Q1
1.08
Min
0.01
Loading chart…
ConocoPhillips (COP) vs. Diamondback Energy (FANG): A comparison of their P/B ratio against the Energy industry group benchmark.

Valuation Metrics

Valuation metrics for ConocoPhillips (COP) and Diamondback Energy (FANG)
MetricCOPFANG
P/E Ratio (TTM)14.3624.09
P/S Ratio (TTM)2.342.83
P/B Ratio (MRQ)2.441.28
Free Cash Flow Yield (TTM)7.12%12.09%