PBF Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

Delek US Holdings has a net margin of -3.41% compared to PBF Energy's net margin of -2.52%. PBF Energy's return on equity of -4.5% beat Delek US Holdings's return on equity of -31.09%.

PBF Energy has a consensus price target of $30.31, signalling upside risk potential of 20.51%. On the other hand Delek US Holdings has an analysts' consensus of $20.14 which suggests that it could grow by 26.37%. Given that Delek US Holdings has higher upside potential than PBF Energy, analysts believe Delek US Holdings is more attractive than PBF Energy.

PBF Energy has a beta of 1.575, which suggesting that the stock is 57.485% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Delek US Holdings has a beta of 1.219, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 21.897%.

PBF Energy has a quarterly dividend of $0.28 per share corresponding to a yield of 4.08%. Delek US Holdings offers a yield of 6.31% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.26 per share. PBF Energy pays 5.19% of its earnings as a dividend. Delek US Holdings pays out 304.55% of its earnings as a dividend. PBF Energy's payout ratio is sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future, but Delek US Holdings's is not.

PBF Energy quarterly revenues are $8.4B, which are larger than Delek US Holdings quarterly revenues of $3B. PBF Energy's net income of -$285.9M is lower than Delek US Holdings's net income of -$76.8M. Notably, PBF Energy's price-to-earnings ratio is 5.67x while Delek US Holdings's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for PBF Energy is 0.09x versus 0.07x for Delek US Holdings. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Marathon Petroleum has a net margin of -3.41% compared to PBF Energy's net margin of 1.77%. PBF Energy's return on equity of -4.5% beat Marathon Petroleum's return on equity of 15.31%.

PBF Energy has a consensus price target of $30.31, signalling upside risk potential of 20.51%. On the other hand Marathon Petroleum has an analysts' consensus of $169.53 which suggests that it could grow by 27.1%. Given that Marathon Petroleum has higher upside potential than PBF Energy, analysts believe Marathon Petroleum is more attractive than PBF Energy.

PBF Energy has a beta of 1.575, which suggesting that the stock is 57.485% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Marathon Petroleum has a beta of 1.396, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 39.569%.

PBF Energy has a quarterly dividend of $0.28 per share corresponding to a yield of 4.08%. Marathon Petroleum offers a yield of 2.54% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.91 per share. PBF Energy pays 5.19% of its earnings as a dividend. Marathon Petroleum pays out 13.03% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

PBF Energy quarterly revenues are $8.4B, which are smaller than Marathon Petroleum quarterly revenues of $35.1B. PBF Energy's net income of -$285.9M is lower than Marathon Petroleum's net income of $622M. Notably, PBF Energy's price-to-earnings ratio is 5.67x while Marathon Petroleum's PE ratio is 10.57x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for PBF Energy is 0.09x versus 0.33x for Marathon Petroleum. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Phillips 66 has a net margin of -3.41% compared to PBF Energy's net margin of 0.97%. PBF Energy's return on equity of -4.5% beat Phillips 66's return on equity of 10.89%.

PBF Energy has a consensus price target of $30.31, signalling upside risk potential of 20.51%. On the other hand Phillips 66 has an analysts' consensus of $141.58 which suggests that it could grow by 28.28%. Given that Phillips 66 has higher upside potential than PBF Energy, analysts believe Phillips 66 is more attractive than PBF Energy.

PBF Energy has a beta of 1.575, which suggesting that the stock is 57.485% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Phillips 66 has a beta of 1.350, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 34.962%.

PBF Energy has a quarterly dividend of $0.28 per share corresponding to a yield of 4.08%. Phillips 66 offers a yield of 4.08% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $1.15 per share. PBF Energy pays 5.19% of its earnings as a dividend. Phillips 66 pays out 26.83% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

PBF Energy quarterly revenues are $8.4B, which are smaller than Phillips 66 quarterly revenues of $35.5B. PBF Energy's net income of -$285.9M is lower than Phillips 66's net income of $346M. Notably, PBF Energy's price-to-earnings ratio is 5.67x while Phillips 66's PE ratio is 14.17x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for PBF Energy is 0.09x versus 0.32x for Phillips 66. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Valero Energy has a net margin of -3.41% compared to PBF Energy's net margin of 1.11%. PBF Energy's return on equity of -4.5% beat Valero Energy's return on equity of 13.03%.

PBF Energy has a consensus price target of $30.31, signalling upside risk potential of 20.51%. On the other hand Valero Energy has an analysts' consensus of $149.39 which suggests that it could grow by 25.97%. Given that Valero Energy has higher upside potential than PBF Energy, analysts believe Valero Energy is more attractive than PBF Energy.

PBF Energy has a beta of 1.575, which suggesting that the stock is 57.485% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Valero Energy has a beta of 1.397, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 39.739%.

PBF Energy has a quarterly dividend of $0.28 per share corresponding to a yield of 4.08%. Valero Energy offers a yield of 3.61% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $1.07 per share. PBF Energy pays 5.19% of its earnings as a dividend. Valero Energy pays out 16.44% of its earnings as a dividend. Both of these payout ratios are sufficient to cover dividend payouts with earnings for the foreseeable future.

PBF Energy quarterly revenues are $8.4B, which are smaller than Valero Energy quarterly revenues of $32.9B. PBF Energy's net income of -$285.9M is lower than Valero Energy's net income of $364M. Notably, PBF Energy's price-to-earnings ratio is 5.67x while Valero Energy's PE ratio is 10.64x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for PBF Energy is 0.09x versus 0.29x for Valero Energy. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.