SafetyMargin.ioSafetyMargin.io
BlogWatchlistCompare
Compare Stocks › COP vs T

ConocoPhillips (COP) vs AT&T Inc. (T)

COP
ConocoPhillips
$123.19
VS
T
AT&T Inc.
$26.12

Rewards

COP
  • ★ConocoPhillips has maintained ROIC above 10% for 4 consecutive years, suggesting solid business economics.
T
  • ★Free cash flow has grown at a 16.2% CAGR over the past 4 years, demonstrating strong earnings power growth.
  • ★Each dollar of retained earnings has created $14.87 of earning power — management is an exceptional capital allocator.
  • ★FCF yield of 10.7% is historically attractive — the business generates significant cash relative to its price.

Risks

COP
  • ⚠Trailing P/E of 20.9x is 73% above the historical average of 12.1x — the stock trades at a premium to its own history.
  • ⚠10 insider sales totaling $81.0M with no purchases in the past 3 months — insiders are reducing their exposure.
  • ⚠Free cash flow has declined at a 26.4% CAGR over the past 4 years — a concerning trend.
T
  • ⚠Altman Z-Score of 0.89 places the company in the distress zone — financial patterns resemble those of companies that experienced bankruptcy.

Key Valuation Metrics

Learn more →
COP
T
Valuation
$7.24B
Free Cash Flow
$19.44B
4.83%
FCF Yield
10.71%
20.88
Trailing P/E
8.59
14.09
Forward P/E
10.22
Quality & Moat
11.77%
ROIC
7.90%
12.38%
ROE
17.15%
45.59%
Gross Margin
59.41%
1.22
PEG Ratio
1.82
Balance Sheet Safety
0.36
Debt / Equity
1.25
N/A
Interest Coverage
N/A
0.73
Net Debt / EBITDA
3.33
2.73%
Dividend Yield
4.25%
COP: 4Ties: 1T: 7
COPT

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.

T

Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation.

Price ÷ Earnings Per Share — how many years of current earnings you're paying for at today's price. Lower P/E may indicate undervaluation.

$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
T
$1.91
created per $1 retained over 3 years
Value Creator
Σ Retained
$22.78B
Δ Market Cap
+$43.59B
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
42.5% Overvalued
Price is 42.5% above estimated fair value
Current Price: $123.19
Fair Value: $86.45
Strongly undervalued
Undervalued
Fairly valued
Overvalued
Strongly overvalued
T
54.8% Margin of Safety
Price is 54.8% below estimated fair value
Current Price: $26.12
Fair Value: $57.83
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 $123?

+8.3%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +9.6%

The market implies +8.3% Owner Earnings growth, above historical trends.

Standard FCF implies a demanding +9.6%, reflecting heavy growth investment.

T

What growth rate is the market pricing in at $26?

+3.8%
Market-Implied Owner Earnings Growth
Standard FCF implies +5.4%

The market implies +3.8% Owner Earnings growth, below historical trends — potential opportunity.

Standard FCF implies a more demanding +5.4%, reflecting heavy growth investment expected to generate future returns.

Economic Moat Score

Learn more →
COP
46/100
Narrow Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Narrow moat with roic consistency as the key competitive advantage. Improving revenue predictability 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.
T
57/100
Narrow Moat
70+ Wide · 40-69 Narrow · <40 None

Narrow moat with margin stability as the key competitive advantage. Improving roic consistency 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.
T
-2.78
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 85.6%Retail & Other 14.3%
No. of Institutional Holders3,020
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.
T
Insiders 0.1%Institutions 68.5%Retail & Other 31.5%
No. of Institutional Holders3,617
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)
2
Buys (12M)
Total value (12M): $999,472
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
T
0
Buys (3M)
0
Buys (12M)
No open market insider purchases found.
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
10
Sells (3M)
11
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $127.29M
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
T
0
Sells (3M)
1
Sells (12M)
Total value (12M): $41,348
SABRINA SANDERS S
Officer
$41,348
@ $27.57 · 2025-05-28
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(58/100)

"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.
T
FearGreed
😐Neutral(55/100)

"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 (58)
T
⚪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 (55)
View COP Full AnalysisView T Full Analysis
COP vs T: Which Is the Better Buy? | SafetyMargin.io