CVR Energy vs Par Pacific
Add, change or remove companies; up to four.
KIRA’s take AI analyst
I put CVR Energy and Par Pacific side by side, using each one’s latest annual report. Here is what stands out:
- Par Pacific is the larger business, with $7.5B of revenue in fiscal 2025 against $7.2B for CVR Energy.
- CVR Energy grew revenue faster (−5.9%, against −6.4%).
- Par Pacific kept more of each dollar of sales as operating profit (7.2% operating margin, against 2.5%).
- Par Pacific turned more of its sales into free cash flow (4.0% FCF margin, against −0.6%).
- Par Pacific earned a higher return on the capital invested in it (19.3%, against 9.1%).
- Investors pay more for each dollar of CVR Energy’s earnings: a P/E of 91.2x against 4.8x for Par Pacific.
Who comes out ahead
Of the 10 measures where higher (or lower) is clearly better, how many each company leads.
CVR Energy
CVI
2/10
Revenue growthPiotroski F-score
Par Pacific
PARR
8/10
5-year growthOperating marginNet marginFCF marginReturn on capitalReturn on equityNet debt / EBITDAShare count change
Side by side
Best in the row
| Latest fiscal year | CVI FY25 | PARR FY25 |
|---|---|---|
| Size | ||
| Market cap | $6.2B | $4.1B |
| Revenue | $7.2B | $7.5B |
| Free cash flow | −$41.0M | $296M |
| Net income | $27.0M | $369M |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth | −5.9% | −6.4% |
| 5-year growth | 12.8% | 19.0% |
| Share count change | 0.0% | −9.1% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 4.8% | — |
| Operating margin | 2.5% | 7.2% |
| Net margin | 0.4% | 5.0% |
| FCF margin | −0.6% | 4.0% |
| Return on capital | 9.1% | 19.3% |
| Return on equity | 3.8% | 27.3% |
| Balance sheet | ||
| Net debt | $1.3B | $653M |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.2x | 1.0x |
| Dividends and buybacks | $0.0M | $125M |
| Valuation & quality | ||
| P/E | 91.2x | 4.8x |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 | 6 |
Ten years
Revenue
Operating margin
Free cash flow
Return on capital
Each company's latest fiscal year; fiscal years end in different months. The best value in each row is highlighted where higher (or lower) is clearly better. Not investment advice.