Seek Returns

FANG vs. PSX: Diamondback Energy vs. Phillips 66 Stock Comparison

How do Diamondback Energy (FANG) and Phillips 66 (PSX) 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

Diamondback Energy (FANG) and Phillips 66 (PSX) both belong to the Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels industry, though FANG is classified under Oil & Gas Exploration & Production while PSX falls under Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing.

Company profile comparison for Diamondback Energy (FANG) and Phillips 66 (PSX)
Profile ItemFANGPSX
NameDiamondback Energy Inc.Phillips 66
Country/RegionUnited StatesUnited States
GICS SectorEnergyEnergy
GICS Industry GroupEnergyEnergy
GICS IndustryOil, Gas & Consumable FuelsOil, Gas & Consumable Fuels
GICS Sub-IndustryOil & Gas Exploration & ProductionOil & Gas Refining & Marketing
Market Capitalization49.96 billion USD95.85 billion USD
CurrencyUSDUSD
ExchangeNasdaqNYSE
Listing DateOctober 12, 2012April 12, 2012
Security TypeCommon StockCommon Stock

Price Performance

Cumulative Growth

FANG
PSX
GSPC
Loading price history…
Diamondback Energy (FANG) vs. Phillips 66 (PSX), 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 Diamondback Energy (FANG) and Phillips 66 (PSX). Returns over one year are annualized.

Calendar-Year Returns

Loading price history…
Calendar-year total returns for Diamondback Energy (FANG) and Phillips 66 (PSX). Each bar is that year's total return, measured year-end to year-end.

Performance Metrics

Price performance metrics for Diamondback Energy (FANG) and Phillips 66 (PSX)
MetricFANGPSX
Total Return (1Y)26.99%88.91%
Total Return (3Y, Annualized)8.52%36.18%
Total Return (5Y, Annualized)14.17%30.83%

Risk Profile

Drawdown History

FANG
PSX
GSPC
Loading price history…
Diamondback Energy (FANG) vs. Phillips 66 (PSX), 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 Diamondback Energy (FANG) and Phillips 66 (PSX). Each bar is the share of months whose return fell in that 5% bucket.

Risk Metrics

Risk profile metrics for Diamondback Energy (FANG) and Phillips 66 (PSX)
MetricFANGPSX
Volatility (1Y, Annualized)33.77%33.42%
Beta (5Y)0.530.72
Max Drawdown (5Y)-42.10%-44.37%
Avg. Volume (3M)2.38M2.92M

Risk-Adjusted Performance

Risk-Return Positioning

Loading chart…
FANG and PSX 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 Diamondback Energy (FANG) and Phillips 66 (PSX)
MetricFANGPSX
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)0.672.53
Sortino Ratio (1Y)0.973.93

Profitability

ROE (TTM)

Phillips 66 (PSX) at 39.84% sits in the top ROE quartile, while Diamondback Energy (FANG) at 4.86% is closer to the peer norm — stronger capital efficiency for PSX.

FANG

Energy industry group

4.86%

Max
53.85%
Q3
24.79%
Median
12.85%
FANG
4.86%
Q1
2.03%
Min
-29.09%

PSX

Energy industry group

39.84%

Max
53.85%
PSX
39.84%
Q3
24.79%
Median
12.85%
Q1
2.03%
Min
-29.09%
Loading chart…
Diamondback Energy (FANG) vs. Phillips 66 (PSX): A comparison of their ROE against the Energy industry group benchmark.

Net Margin (TTM)

Both Diamondback Energy (FANG) at 11.62% and Phillips 66 (PSX) at 7.48% keep about the typical share of revenue as profit for their industries — neither bottom line stands out from peers.

FANG

Energy industry group

11.62%

Max
56.92%
Q3
22.92%
FANG
11.62%
Median
10.10%
Q1
0.07%
Min
-27.38%

PSX

Energy industry group

7.48%

Max
56.92%
Q3
22.92%
Median
10.10%
PSX
7.48%
Q1
0.07%
Min
-27.38%
Loading chart…
Diamondback Energy (FANG) vs. Phillips 66 (PSX): 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 Phillips 66 (PSX) at 13.17%, which runs around its industry’s norm.

FANG

Energy industry group

44.95%

Max
71.31%
FANG
44.95%
Q3
33.75%
Median
18.73%
Q1
6.94%
Min
-24.52%

PSX

Energy industry group

13.17%

Max
71.31%
Q3
33.75%
Median
18.73%
PSX
13.17%
Q1
6.94%
Min
-24.52%
Loading chart…
Diamondback Energy (FANG) vs. Phillips 66 (PSX): A comparison of their operating margin against the Energy industry group benchmark.

Profitability Metrics

Profitability metrics for Diamondback Energy (FANG) and Phillips 66 (PSX)
MetricFANGPSX
ROE (TTM)4.86%39.84%
ROA (TTM)2.07%10.64%
Net Margin (TTM)11.62%7.48%
Operating Margin (TTM)44.95%13.17%
Gross Margin (TTM)73.62%15.08%

Growth

Revenue Growth

Diamondback Energy (FANG) at 35.44% sits in the top revenue growth quartile, while Phillips 66 (PSX) at -7.53% is in the bottom quartile, showing a clear gap in revenue momentum.

Loading chart…
Diamondback Energy (FANG) vs. Phillips 66 (PSX): A comparison of their Revenue Growth across different time periods.

EPS Growth

Phillips 66 (PSX) at 116.23% 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…
Diamondback Energy (FANG) vs. Phillips 66 (PSX): A comparison of their EPS Growth across different time periods.

Growth Metrics

Growth metrics for Diamondback Energy (FANG) and Phillips 66 (PSX)
MetricFANGPSX
Revenue Growth (YoY)35.44%-7.53%
Revenue Growth (3Y CAGR)15.99%-8.00%
EPS Growth (YoY)-63.10%116.23%
EPS Growth (3Y CAGR)-38.48%-22.60%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

Phillips 66 (PSX) at 1.34 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.

FANG

Energy industry group

0.55

Max
3.64
Q3
2.21
Median
1.41
Q1
0.88
FANG
0.55
Min
0.24

PSX

Energy industry group

1.34

Max
3.64
Q3
2.21
Median
1.41
PSX
1.34
Q1
0.88
Min
0.24
Loading chart…
Diamondback Energy (FANG) vs. Phillips 66 (PSX): 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 Phillips 66 (PSX) at 0.52 runs a more typical debt-to-equity mix.

FANG

Energy industry group

0.29

Max
1.75
Q3
0.93
Median
0.54
Q1
0.30
FANG
0.29
Min
0.00

PSX

Energy industry group

0.52

Max
1.75
Q3
0.93
Median
0.54
PSX
0.52
Q1
0.30
Min
0.00
Loading chart…
Diamondback Energy (FANG) vs. Phillips 66 (PSX): A comparison of their debt-to-equity ratio against the Energy industry group benchmark.

Financial Strength Metrics

Financial strength metrics for Diamondback Energy (FANG) and Phillips 66 (PSX)
MetricFANGPSX
Current Ratio (MRQ)0.551.34
Debt / Equity (MRQ)0.290.52
Net Debt / EBITDA0.990.82

Dividends

Dividend Yield (TTM)

Both Diamondback Energy (FANG) at 2.47% and Phillips 66 (PSX) at 2.03% pay solid, industry-typical yields, sitting squarely within their peers’ usual range.

FANG

Energy industry group

2.47%

Max
8.57%
Q3
3.58%
FANG
2.47%
Median
1.71%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%

PSX

Energy industry group

2.03%

Max
8.57%
Q3
3.58%
PSX
2.03%
Median
1.71%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%
Loading chart…
Diamondback Energy (FANG) vs. Phillips 66 (PSX): A comparison of their dividend yield against the Energy industry group benchmark.

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

Phillips 66 (PSX) at 16.07% 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.

FANG

Energy industry group

57.20%

Max
133.24%
FANG
57.20%
Q3
53.31%
Median
25.24%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%

PSX

Energy industry group

16.07%

Max
133.24%
Q3
53.31%
Median
25.24%
PSX
16.07%
Q1
0.00%
Min
0.00%
Loading chart…
Diamondback Energy (FANG) vs. Phillips 66 (PSX): A comparison of their payout ratio against the Energy industry group benchmark.

Dividend Metrics

Dividend metrics for Diamondback Energy (FANG) and Phillips 66 (PSX)
MetricFANGPSX
Dividend Yield (TTM)2.47%2.03%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)57.20%16.07%

Valuation

P/E Ratio (TTM)

Phillips 66 (PSX) at 7.88 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.

FANG

Energy industry group

24.09

Max
39.54
FANG
24.09
Q3
21.72
Median
12.19
Q1
7.71
Min
2.99

PSX

Energy industry group

7.88

Max
39.54
Q3
21.72
Median
12.19
PSX
7.88
Q1
7.71
Min
2.99
Loading chart…
Diamondback Energy (FANG) vs. Phillips 66 (PSX): A comparison of their P/E ratio against the Energy industry group benchmark.

P/S Ratio (TTM)

Phillips 66 (PSX) at 0.57 sits in the cheaper P/S ratio quartile while Diamondback Energy (FANG) at 2.83 prices around its industry’s middle — PSX costs less per dollar of sales, though read it alongside growth and margins.

FANG

Energy industry group

2.83

Max
5.40
Q3
2.85
FANG
2.83
Median
1.69
Q1
0.88
Min
0.00

PSX

Energy industry group

0.57

Max
5.40
Q3
2.85
Median
1.69
Q1
0.88
PSX
0.57
Min
0.00
Loading chart…
Diamondback Energy (FANG) vs. Phillips 66 (PSX): 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 Phillips 66 (PSX) at 2.79 carries an above-peer premium to book — PSX is pricier on assets.

FANG

Energy industry group

1.28

Max
4.21
Q3
2.38
Median
1.51
FANG
1.28
Q1
1.08
Min
0.01

PSX

Energy industry group

2.79

Max
4.21
PSX
2.79
Q3
2.38
Median
1.51
Q1
1.08
Min
0.01
Loading chart…
Diamondback Energy (FANG) vs. Phillips 66 (PSX): A comparison of their P/B ratio against the Energy industry group benchmark.

Valuation Metrics

Valuation metrics for Diamondback Energy (FANG) and Phillips 66 (PSX)
MetricFANGPSX
P/E Ratio (TTM)24.097.88
P/S Ratio (TTM)2.830.57
P/B Ratio (MRQ)1.282.79
Free Cash Flow Yield (TTM)12.09%9.93%