vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Diamondback Energy (FANG) and Phillips 66 (PSX), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Phillips 66 is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($34.1B vs $3.4B, roughly 10.1× Diamondback Energy). Phillips 66 runs the higher net margin — -43.2% vs 8.5%, a 51.7% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Phillips 66 posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (1.3% vs -9.0%). Over the past eight quarters, Diamondback Energy's revenue compounded faster (23.1% CAGR vs -2.4%).
Diamondback Energy, headquartered in Midland, Texas, is an American company engaged in hydrocarbon exploration in the Permian Basin.
The Phillips 66 Company is an American multinational energy company headquartered in Westchase, Houston, Texas. Its name, dating back to 1927 as a trademark of the Phillips Petroleum Company, assisted in establishing the newly reconfigured Phillips 66. The company today was formed ten years after Phillips merged with Conoco to form ConocoPhillips.
FANG vs PSX — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $3.4B | $34.1B |
| Net Profit | $-1.5B | $2.9B |
| Gross Margin | — | 14.6% |
| Operating Margin | -82.4% | — |
| Net Margin | -43.2% | 8.5% |
| Revenue YoY | -9.0% | 1.3% |
| Net Profit YoY | -235.8% | 36225.0% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-4.99 | $7.14 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | $3.4B | $34.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.9B | $34.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.7B | $33.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.0B | $30.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.7B | $33.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.6B | $35.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.5B | $38.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.2B | $35.8B |
| Q4 25 | $-1.5B | $2.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.0B | $133.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $699.0M | $877.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.4B | $487.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1B | $8.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $659.0M | $346.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $837.0M | $1.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $768.0M | $748.0M |
| Q4 25 | — | 14.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 12.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 12.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 9.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 8.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 9.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 9.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 9.6% |
| Q4 25 | -82.4% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 31.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 31.0% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 41.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 38.0% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 26.8% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 46.6% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 50.2% | — |
| Q4 25 | -43.2% | 8.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 25.9% | 0.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 19.0% | 2.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 34.7% | 1.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 28.9% | 0.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 24.9% | 1.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 33.7% | 2.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 34.5% | 2.1% |
| Q4 25 | $-4.99 | $7.14 | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.51 | $0.32 | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.38 | $2.15 | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.83 | $1.18 | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.40 | $0.06 | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.19 | $0.82 | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.66 | $2.38 | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.28 | $1.73 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $104.0M | $1.1B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $13.7B | $18.7B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $37.0B | $29.1B |
| Total Assets | $71.1B | $73.7B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.37× | 0.64× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $104.0M | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $159.0M | $1.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $219.0M | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.8B | $1.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $161.0M | $1.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $370.0M | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.9B | $2.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $896.0M | $1.6B |
| Q4 25 | $13.7B | $18.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $15.8B | $19.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $15.1B | $17.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $13.0B | $17.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $12.1B | $18.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.9B | $18.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $12.0B | $17.2B | ||
| Q1 24 | $6.6B | $17.8B |
| Q4 25 | $37.0B | $29.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $39.1B | $26.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $38.9B | $27.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $38.5B | $27.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $37.7B | $27.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $37.4B | $28.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $17.4B | $29.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | $16.9B | $29.7B |
| Q4 25 | $71.1B | $73.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $76.2B | $76.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $71.9B | $75.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | $70.1B | $71.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $67.3B | $72.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $65.7B | $75.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $35.6B | $75.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $29.7B | $76.4B |
| Q4 25 | 0.37× | 0.64× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.41× | 0.71× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.39× | 0.63× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.34× | 0.65× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.32× | 0.67× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.32× | 0.64× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.69× | 0.58× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.39× | 0.60× |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $2.3B | $2.8B |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | — | 0.95× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $2.3B | $2.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.4B | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.7B | $845.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.4B | $187.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.3B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.2B | $1.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.5B | $2.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.3B | $-236.0M |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.95× | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.34× | 8.86× | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.40× | 0.96× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.68× | 0.38× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.18× | 149.75× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.83× | 3.27× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.83× | 2.07× | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.74× | -0.32× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
FANG
| Oil Explorationand Production | $2.7B | 81% |
| Oil Purchased | $308.0M | 9% |
| Natural Gas Liquids Production | $293.0M | 9% |
| Natural Gas Production | $4.0M | 0% |
PSX
| Marketing Speciality Segment | $21.7B | 64% |
| Crude Oil | $3.7B | 11% |
| GB | $3.5B | 10% |
| Other Geographical Areas | $2.4B | 7% |
| DE | $1.1B | 3% |
| Renewable Fuels | $876.0M | 3% |
| Other Product Line | $634.0M | 2% |
