Chesapeake Utilities vs NW Natural
Add, change or remove companies; up to four.
KIRA’s take AI analyst
I put Chesapeake Utilities and NW Natural side by side, using each one’s latest annual report. Here is what stands out:
- NW Natural is the larger business, with $1.3B of revenue in fiscal 2025 against $930M for Chesapeake Utilities.
- Chesapeake Utilities grew revenue faster (18.1%, against 11.8%).
- Chesapeake Utilities kept more of each dollar of sales as operating profit (27.5% operating margin, against 21.8%).
- NW Natural turned more of its sales into free cash flow (−15.3% FCF margin, against −23.1%).
Who comes out ahead
Of the 10 measures where higher (or lower) is clearly better, how many each company leads.
Chesapeake Utilities
CPK
8/10
Revenue growth5-year growthOperating marginNet marginReturn on capitalReturn on equityNet debt / EBITDAShare count change
NW Natural
NWN
1/10
FCF margin
Side by side
Best in the row
| Latest fiscal year | CPK FY25 | NWN FY25 |
|---|---|---|
| Size | ||
| Market cap | $3.2B | $2.1B |
| Revenue | $930M | $1.3B |
| Free cash flow | −$215M | −$198M |
| Net income | $140M | $113M |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth | 18.1% | 11.8% |
| 5-year growth | 13.8% | 10.8% |
| Share count change | 4.3% | 5.4% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | — | — |
| Operating margin | 27.5% | 21.8% |
| Net margin | 15.1% | 8.8% |
| FCF margin | −23.1% | −15.3% |
| Return on capital | 6.1% | 5.7% |
| Return on equity | 9.4% | 7.9% |
| Balance sheet | ||
| Net debt | $1.7B | $2.6B |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 4.8x | 5.8x |
| Dividends and buybacks | $60.7M | $77.3M |
| Valuation & quality | ||
| P/E | — | 16.5x |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 5 |
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.