Seek Returns

CVE vs. FANG: Cenovus Energy vs. Diamondback Energy Stock Comparison

How do Cenovus Energy (CVE) 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

Cenovus Energy (CVE) and Diamondback Energy (FANG) both belong to the Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels industry, though CVE is classified under Integrated Oil & Gas while FANG falls under Oil & Gas Exploration & Production.

Company profile comparison for Cenovus Energy (CVE) and Diamondback Energy (FANG)
Profile ItemCVEFANG
NameCenovus Energy Inc.Diamondback Energy Inc.
Country/RegionCanadaUnited States
GICS SectorEnergyEnergy
GICS Industry GroupEnergyEnergy
GICS IndustryOil, Gas & Consumable FuelsOil, Gas & Consumable Fuels
GICS Sub-IndustryIntegrated Oil & GasOil & Gas Exploration & Production
Market Capitalization49.61 billion USD49.96 billion USD
CurrencyUSDUSD
ExchangeNYSENasdaq
Listing DateNovember 17, 2009October 12, 2012
Security TypeCommon StockCommon Stock

Price Performance

Cumulative Growth

CVE
FANG
GSPC
Loading price history…
Cenovus Energy (CVE) 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 Cenovus Energy (CVE) and Diamondback Energy (FANG). Returns over one year are annualized.

Calendar-Year Returns

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

Performance Metrics

Price performance metrics for Cenovus Energy (CVE) and Diamondback Energy (FANG)
MetricCVEFANG
Total Return (1Y)60.99%26.99%
Total Return (3Y, Annualized)19.41%8.52%
Total Return (5Y, Annualized)18.63%14.17%

Risk Profile

Drawdown History

CVE
FANG
GSPC
Loading price history…
Cenovus Energy (CVE) 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 Cenovus Energy (CVE) and Diamondback Energy (FANG). Each bar is the share of months whose return fell in that 5% bucket.

Risk Metrics

Risk profile metrics for Cenovus Energy (CVE) and Diamondback Energy (FANG)
MetricCVEFANG
Volatility (1Y, Annualized)37.47%33.77%
Beta (5Y)0.430.53
Max Drawdown (5Y)-53.51%-42.10%
Avg. Volume (3M)6.90M2.38M

Risk-Adjusted Performance

Risk-Return Positioning

Loading chart…
CVE 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 Cenovus Energy (CVE) and Diamondback Energy (FANG)
MetricCVEFANG
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)1.510.67
Sortino Ratio (1Y)2.200.97

Profitability

ROE (TTM)

Cenovus Energy (CVE) at 27.44% sits in the top ROE quartile, while Diamondback Energy (FANG) at 4.86% is closer to the peer norm — stronger capital efficiency for CVE.

CVE

Energy industry group

27.44%

Max
53.85%
CVE
27.44%
Q3
24.79%
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…
Cenovus Energy (CVE) vs. Diamondback Energy (FANG): A comparison of their ROE against the Energy industry group benchmark.

Net Margin (TTM)

Both Cenovus Energy (CVE) at 15.42% 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.

CVE

Energy industry group

15.42%

Max
56.92%
Q3
22.92%
CVE
15.42%
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…
Cenovus Energy (CVE) 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 Cenovus Energy (CVE) at 26.58%, which runs around its industry’s norm.

CVE

Energy industry group

26.58%

Max
71.31%
Q3
33.75%
CVE
26.58%
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…
Cenovus Energy (CVE) vs. Diamondback Energy (FANG): A comparison of their operating margin against the Energy industry group benchmark.

Profitability Metrics

Profitability metrics for Cenovus Energy (CVE) and Diamondback Energy (FANG)
MetricCVEFANG
ROE (TTM)27.44%4.86%
ROA (TTM)12.05%2.07%
Net Margin (TTM)15.42%11.62%
Operating Margin (TTM)26.58%44.95%
Gross Margin (TTM)33.92%73.62%

Growth

Revenue Growth

Diamondback Energy (FANG) at 35.44% sits in the top revenue growth quartile, while Cenovus Energy (CVE) at -8.62% is in the bottom quartile, showing a clear gap in revenue momentum.

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

EPS Growth

Cenovus Energy (CVE) at 28.74% sits in the top EPS growth quartile, while Diamondback Energy (FANG) at -63.10% is in the bottom quartile, showing a clear gap in earnings momentum.

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

Growth Metrics

Growth metrics for Cenovus Energy (CVE) and Diamondback Energy (FANG)
MetricCVEFANG
Revenue Growth (YoY)-8.62%35.44%
Revenue Growth (3Y CAGR)-9.75%15.99%
EPS Growth (YoY)28.74%-63.10%
EPS Growth (3Y CAGR)-12.42%-38.48%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

Cenovus Energy (CVE) at 1.64 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.

CVE

Energy industry group

1.64

Max
3.64
Q3
2.21
CVE
1.64
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…
Cenovus Energy (CVE) 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 Cenovus Energy (CVE) at 0.33 runs a more typical debt-to-equity mix.

CVE

Energy industry group

0.33

Max
1.75
Q3
0.93
Median
0.54
CVE
0.33
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…
Cenovus Energy (CVE) 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 Cenovus Energy (CVE) and Diamondback Energy (FANG)
MetricCVEFANG
Current Ratio (MRQ)1.640.55
Debt / Equity (MRQ)0.330.29
Net Debt / EBITDA0.350.99

Dividends

Dividend Yield (TTM)

Both Cenovus Energy (CVE) at 3.04% and Diamondback Energy (FANG) at 2.47% pay solid, industry-typical yields, sitting squarely within their peers’ usual range.

CVE

Energy industry group

3.04%

Max
8.57%
Q3
3.58%
CVE
3.04%
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…
Cenovus Energy (CVE) vs. Diamondback Energy (FANG): A comparison of their dividend yield against the Energy industry group benchmark.

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

Cenovus Energy (CVE) at 22.84% 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.

CVE

Energy industry group

22.84%

Max
133.24%
Q3
53.31%
Median
25.24%
CVE
22.84%
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…
Cenovus Energy (CVE) vs. Diamondback Energy (FANG): A comparison of their payout ratio against the Energy industry group benchmark.

Dividend Metrics

Dividend metrics for Cenovus Energy (CVE) and Diamondback Energy (FANG)
MetricCVEFANG
Dividend Yield (TTM)3.04%2.47%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)22.84%57.20%

Valuation

P/E Ratio (TTM)

Cenovus Energy (CVE) at 10.56 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.

CVE

Energy industry group

10.56

Max
39.54
Q3
21.72
Median
12.19
CVE
10.56
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…
Cenovus Energy (CVE) vs. Diamondback Energy (FANG): A comparison of their P/E ratio against the Energy industry group benchmark.

P/S Ratio (TTM)

Cenovus Energy (CVE) at 0.88 sits in the cheaper P/S ratio quartile while Diamondback Energy (FANG) at 2.83 prices around its industry’s middle — CVE costs less per dollar of sales, though read it alongside growth and margins.

CVE

Energy industry group

0.88

Max
5.40
Q3
2.85
Median
1.69
Q1
0.88
CVE
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…
Cenovus Energy (CVE) vs. Diamondback Energy (FANG): A comparison of their P/S ratio against the Energy industry group benchmark.

P/B Ratio (MRQ)

On P/B ratio, both Cenovus Energy (CVE) at 1.98 and Diamondback Energy (FANG) at 1.28 are valued close to their industries’ norm against book — neither stands out from peers.

CVE

Energy industry group

1.98

Max
4.21
Q3
2.38
CVE
1.98
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…
Cenovus Energy (CVE) vs. Diamondback Energy (FANG): A comparison of their P/B ratio against the Energy industry group benchmark.

Valuation Metrics

Valuation metrics for Cenovus Energy (CVE) and Diamondback Energy (FANG)
MetricCVEFANG
P/E Ratio (TTM)10.5624.09
P/S Ratio (TTM)0.882.83
P/B Ratio (MRQ)1.981.28
Free Cash Flow Yield (TTM)20.71%12.09%