COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026

COP vs SM

Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. COP scored 56.5, SM scored 61.4 — SM leads.
Compare another set
COP
ConocoPhillips
Oil & Gas E&P · Quality-Growth
56.5
$134.87 · $162.0B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
4.9
SM leads
SM
SM Energy Company
Oil & Gas E&P · Quality-Growth
61.4
$37.20 · $8.8B
fundamentals as of
  • CheapestSM6.6x
  • Fastest growthSM+75.4%
  • Strongest balance sheetCOP0.36
  • Highest qualityCOP86 / 100
  • Largest discount to fair valueSM-39%
THE BULL RANKINGS SCORECARD56.5/ 100 · BULL SCOREPEER MEDIANQUALITY85.8GROWTH50.0VALUE42.0
THE BULL RANKINGS SCORECARD61.4/ 100 · BULL SCOREPEER MEDIANQUALITY72.8GROWTH50.0VALUE63.6
COPSMQuality85.872.8Growth50.050.0Value42.063.6
cheap & fastrevenue growth →← cheaper (lower multiple)-1%19%+13x23x+COPoff-scaleSM

Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.

FCFCOP$11.8bSM$743m
RevCOP+9.2%SM+75.4%
D/ECOP0.36SM0.95
P/ECOP17.8xSM6.6x
PEGCOP1.03SM0.65
COP
stronger →← stronger
SM
86
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
73
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
42
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
64
COP and SM split the three pillars evenly.
COP
SM
$11.8bA-
FCF
$743mC+
+9.2%B
Rev
+75.4%A
0.36B+
D/E
0.95C+
17.8xB
P/E
6.6xA
1.03B+
PEG
0.65A-
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
COP
SM
13% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
39% below
~1%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-7%/yr
-1%
1-yr DCF upside
+59%
-11%
5-yr DCF upside
+63%
-23%
10-yr DCF upside
+69%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
COP
Why this score
  • Buying back stock
  • Raising its dividend
  • Cyclical growth
SM
Why this score
  • Raising its dividend
  • Cyclical growth
COPConocoPhillips
Oil & Gas E&P · $134.87 · beta 0.12
Why now
Oil & Gas E&P · market cap $162.0b. Trading near 52-week high of $135.88 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. 24 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $144.29 (implying +7% upside).
Moat
Net margin 16% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 14% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 127% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Trading within 1% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. Hedge-book exposure — many commodity producers hedge forward production; if the hedge book is concentrated at prices well below spot, the upside the market expects is already locked away.
SMSM Energy Company
Oil & Gas E&P · $37.20 · beta 0.74
Why now
Oil & Gas E&P · market cap $8.8b. Trading near 52-week high of $38.25 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. Revenue growing +75% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.65 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 15 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $40.60 (implying +9% upside).
Moat
Net margin 18% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 13% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere.
Risk
Trading within 3% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. Commodity exposure — earnings power tracks the price of the underlying commodity, not management execution. A 15-20% move in the commodity reprices the equity well before fundamentals catch up.
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.

Where COP and SM diverge

On the headline score the gap is 4.9 points in favor of SM. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.

Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.