Compare StocksCOP vs EOG

ConocoPhillips (COP) vs EOG Resources, Inc. (EOG): Which Is the Better Buy in 2026?

As of 2026-06-19, COP is fairly valued at $108, with a DCF intrinsic value of $113 and a margin of safety of 5%. EOG is fairly valued at $130, with an intrinsic value of $149 and a margin of safety of 13%. Of the two, EOG has the wider margin of safety.

COP
ConocoPhillips
$107.74
VS
EOG
EOG Resources, Inc.
$129.98

Rewards

COP
  • PEG ratio of 0.94 suggests the stock is undervalued relative to its growth rate — paying less than 1x for each unit of earnings growth.
EOG
  • EOG Resources, Inc. has maintained ROIC above 10% for 4 consecutive years, suggesting solid business economics.
  • Gross margin of 62.0% indicates strong pricing power — typical of businesses with significant intellectual property or brand strength.

Risks

COP
  • ROIC has declined by 17.9 percentage points over the past 4 years, which may signal competitive erosion.
  • Buybacks have been poorly timed — 3 out of 4 years involved repurchases at relatively expensive valuations.
  • FCF yield of 5.5% suggests reasonable valuation assuming continued moderate growth.
EOG
  • 9 insider sales with no purchases over the past 12 months — a persistent pattern of insider selling.
  • Free cash flow has declined at a 17.3% CAGR over the past 4 years — a concerning trend.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
COP
EOG
Valuation
$7.24B
Free Cash Flow
$2.86B
5.52%
FCF Yield
4.14%
18.26
Trailing P/E
12.78
11.72
Forward P/E
8.77
Quality & Moat
11.77%
ROIC
17.99%
11.28%
ROE
18.20%
45.59%
Gross Margin
61.99%
0.94
PEG Ratio
1.06
Balance Sheet Safety
0.26
Net Debt / Equity
0.14
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
0.73
Net Debt / EBITDA
0.35
3.02%
Dividend Yield
3.09%
COP: 3Ties: 2EOG: 7
COPEOG

Historical Fundamentals

Learn more →
COP

Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation. The dashed forward point is the forward P/E — today's price ÷ analyst consensus EPS.

EOG

Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation. The dashed forward point is the forward P/E — today's price ÷ analyst consensus EPS.

Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation. The dashed forward point is the forward P/E — today's price ÷ analyst consensus EPS.

$1 Retained Earnings Test

Learn more →
COP
$-1.99
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Market Cap Declined
Σ Retained
$14.97B
Δ Market Cap
$-29.73B
Buffett's "$1 Test": For every $1 of earnings retained, has management created at least $1 of market value?
> $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer
EOG
$-1.73
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Market Cap Declined
Σ Retained
$11.34B
Δ Market Cap
$-19.66B
Buffett's "$1 Test": For every $1 of earnings retained, has management created at least $1 of market value?
> $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer

Buffett's "$1 Test": For every $1 of earnings retained, has management created at least $1 of market value?
> $1 created per $1 retained = Value Creator · < $1 created = Value Destroyer

Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) Analysis

Learn more →
COP
24.6% Overvalued
Price is 24.6% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $107.74
Fair Value: $86.45
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
EOG
12.6% Margin of Safety
Price is 12.6% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $129.98
Fair Value: $148.65
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued

Reverse DCF — Market-Implied Growth

Learn more →
COP

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $108?

+6.7%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +8.0%

The market implies +6.7% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +8.0%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

EOG

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $130?

+11.1%
Market-Implied FCF Growth Rate

Market pricing in significantly higher growth than history — aggressive.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
COP
38/100
No Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

No durable moat detected, though roic consistency shows some competitive positioning. The business lacks consistent evidence of sustainable advantages.

Composite score measuring competitive advantage durability across four dimensions: returns above cost of capital, pricing power stability, revenue predictability, and capital efficiency. Based on 4 years of fundamental data.
EOG
53/100
Narrow Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Narrow moat with roic consistency as the key competitive advantage. Improving reinvestment efficiency would strengthen the moat.

Composite score measuring competitive advantage durability across four dimensions: returns above cost of capital, pricing power stability, revenue predictability, and capital efficiency. Based on 4 years of fundamental data.

Forensic Accounting

Learn more →
COP
-2.89
Unlikely Manipulator
Above -1.78 = likely manipulator · -2.22 to -1.78 = grey zone

M-Score Trend

Beneish's 8-variable model estimates the probability of earnings manipulation. An M-Score above -1.78 signals elevated risk — companies in this range have historically been 3-5× more likely to be manipulating earnings. Scores between -2.22 and -1.78 fall in a grey zone warranting further investigation.
EOG
-3.06
Unlikely Manipulator
Above -1.78 = likely manipulator · -2.22 to -1.78 = grey zone

M-Score Trend

Beneish's 8-variable model estimates the probability of earnings manipulation. An M-Score above -1.78 signals elevated risk — companies in this range have historically been 3-5× more likely to be manipulating earnings. Scores between -2.22 and -1.78 fall in a grey zone warranting further investigation.

Beneish's 8-variable model estimates the probability of earnings manipulation. An M-Score above -1.78 signals elevated risk — companies in this range have historically been 3-5× more likely to be manipulating earnings. Scores between -2.22 and -1.78 fall in a grey zone warranting further investigation.

Ownership Breakdown

Learn more →
COP
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 87.6%Retail & Other 12.3%
No. of Institutional Holders3,171
High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders — a key signal in Buffett-style analysis. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.
EOG
Insiders 0.3%Institutions 97.8%Retail & Other 2.0%
No. of Institutional Holders2,099
High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders — a key signal in Buffett-style analysis. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.

High insider ownership aligns management incentives with shareholders. Institutional concentration can indicate smart-money conviction but also crowding risk.

Insider Buying Activity

Learn more →
COP
0
Buys (3M)
1
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $500,000
MCRAVEN WILLIAM H.
Director
$500,000
@ $86.69 · 2025-11-10
JOHNSON KIRK L
Officer
$499,472
@ $94.24 · 2025-06-16
MURTI ARJUN N
Director
$239,675
@ $95.87 · 2024-12-20
WALKER R A
Director
$1.02M
@ $97.80 · 2024-12-17
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises
EOG
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
LEITZELL JEFFREY R
Chief Operating Officer
$755.00
@ $107.86 · 2025-05-07
Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises

Open market purchases · includes direct & indirect ownership · excludes option exercises.

Insider Selling Activity

Learn more →
COP
3
Sells (3M)
12
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $127.52M
MULLIGAN SHARMILA
Director
$234,906
@ $119.00 · 2026-06-10
ROSE KELLY BRUNETTI
General Counsel
$1.00M
@ $130.03 · 2026-03-24
OLDS NICHOLAS G
Officer
$888,651
@ $127.06 · 2026-03-23
LANCE RYAN MICHAEL
Chief Executive Officer
$64.49M
@ $127.26 · 2026-03-20
HRAP HEATHER G.
Officer
$317,631
@ $119.68 · 2026-03-13
LUNDQUIST ANDREW D
Officer
$4.13M
@ $119.68 · 2026-03-13
OLDS NICHOLAS G
Officer
$1.73M
@ $119.36 · 2026-03-12
HAYNES-WELSH KONTESSA S.
Officer
$1.24M
@ $120.07 · 2026-03-12
OLDS NICHOLAS G
Officer
$1.41M
@ $116.37 · 2026-03-11
ROSE KELLY BRUNETTI
General Counsel
$1.00M
@ $118.04 · 2026-03-09
LEACH TIMOTHY ALLEN
Director
$4.75M
@ $118.79 · 2026-03-06
LANCE RYAN MICHAEL
Chief Executive Officer
$46.32M
@ $92.50 · 2025-12-19
LEACH TIMOTHY ALLEN
Director
$6.00M
@ $108.11 · 2024-08-13
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives
EOG
2
Sells (3M)
9
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $3.28M
CRISP CHARLES RICHARD
Director
$256,953
@ $136.17 · 2026-05-28
LEITZELL JEFFREY R
Chief Operating Officer
$856,523
@ $150.32 · 2026-03-31
JANSSEN ANN D
Chief Financial Officer
$348,814
@ $134.31 · 2026-03-12
LEITZELL JEFFREY R
Chief Operating Officer
$484,535
@ $128.39 · 2026-03-03
LEITZELL JEFFREY R
Chief Operating Officer
$250,000
@ $125.00 · 2026-02-19
LEITZELL JEFFREY R
Chief Operating Officer
$211,360
@ $105.68 · 2025-12-31
LEITZELL JEFFREY R
Chief Operating Officer
$211,662
@ $112.05 · 2025-09-30
CRISP CHARLES RICHARD
Director
$190,657
@ $119.99 · 2025-08-15
LEITZELL JEFFREY R
Chief Operating Officer
$472,857
@ $119.65 · 2025-07-01
LEITZELL JEFFREY R
Chief Operating Officer
$515,772
@ $127.76 · 2025-04-01
LEITZELL JEFFREY R
Chief Operating Officer
$483,560
@ $120.89 · 2024-12-31
CLARK JANET F
Director
$76,867
@ $135.33 · 2024-11-19
DONALDSON MICHAEL P
General Counsel
$1.43M
@ $129.50 · 2024-08-26
CRISP CHARLES RICHARD
Director
$816,405
@ $125.60 · 2024-08-21
LEITZELL JEFFREY R
Chief Operating Officer
$505,920
@ $126.48 · 2024-08-09
Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives

Direct ownership only · excludes indirect, option exercises, planned (10b5-1) sales & derivatives.

🎭 Mr. Market's Mood

Learn more →
COP
FearGreed
😐Neutral(46/100)

"Market is pricing this stock without strong emotion in either direction"

Composite sentiment score based on 6 market signals. Inspired by Buffett's "Mr. Market" allegory — fear = potential opportunity, greed = potential risk. Must be used alongside fundamental analysis, not in isolation.
EOG
FearGreed
😐Neutral(50/100)

"Market is pricing this stock without strong emotion in either direction"

Composite sentiment score based on 6 market signals. Inspired by Buffett's "Mr. Market" allegory — fear = potential opportunity, greed = potential risk. Must be used alongside fundamental analysis, not in isolation.

Composite sentiment score based on market signals. Inspired by Buffett’s "Mr. Market" allegory — fear = potential opportunity, greed = potential risk. Must be used alongside fundamental analysis, not in isolation.

⚖️ Buffett Signal

Learn more →
COP
Awaiting DCF Data

The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.

DCF Margin of Safety: N/AMr. Market's Mood: Neutral (46)
EOG
Awaiting DCF Data

The Buffett Signal cross-references market sentiment with DCF valuation. Configure the DCF Analysis above to generate a signal.

DCF Margin of Safety: N/AMr. Market's Mood: Neutral (50)
View COP Full AnalysisView EOG Full Analysis

Frequently Asked Questions: COP vs EOG

Is ConocoPhillips or EOG Resources, Inc. more undervalued in 2026?

Based on our discounted cash flow model, EOG trades at a 12.6% margin of safety (intrinsic value $149 vs. price $130), compared to COP's 4.7% margin of safety (intrinsic $113 vs. $108).

Which stock has a wider economic moat, ConocoPhillips or EOG Resources, Inc.?

EOG scores 53/100 (Narrow moat), while COP scores 38/100 (None moat). The moat score measures competitive advantage durability across ROIC consistency, margin stability, revenue predictability, and reinvestment efficiency.

Is ConocoPhillips in financial distress?

COP's Altman Z-Score of 2.8 places it in the Grey zone, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk. EOG scores 3.3 (Safe zone). The Altman Z-Score is a five-factor model that predicts insolvency within two years; scores below 1.81 indicate significant distress.

Which company has better free cash flow, ConocoPhillips or EOG Resources, Inc.?

ConocoPhillips (COP) generates a 5.5% free cash flow yield, compared to EOG Resources, Inc.'s 4.1%. A higher FCF yield means the business converts more of its market value into cash that can be returned to shareholders or reinvested.

Which stock has higher return on invested capital, ConocoPhillips or EOG Resources, Inc.?

EOG earns 18.0% ROIC versus COP's 11.8%. A higher ROIC means the company generates more profit per dollar of capital employed, a hallmark of durable competitive advantage in Buffett-style analysis.

Which dividend is safer, ConocoPhillips's or EOG Resources, Inc.'s?

COP's dividend earns a safety score of 78/100 (Safe), compared to EOG's 73/100 (Safe). COP has raised its dividend for 1 consecutive years.