Peabody Energy (BTU) vs Warrior Met Coal (HCC)
Head-to-head comparison of performance, valuation, growth, profitability and dividends. Prices delayed 15 minutes; data as of Oct 8, 2026.
Summary
Warrior Met Coal (HCC) has outperformed Peabody Energy (BTU) over the past year, gaining 40.6% versus a loss of 23.3%. Over five years, HCC leads with a +238.9% price change compared with +55.7% for BTU. Warrior Met Coal is the larger company by market cap ($4.77 billion vs $3.06 billion), about 1.6 times the size, while Peabody Energy is growing revenue faster (-8.9% vs -14.1%).
On valuation, Peabody Energy trades at a lower forward P/E (8.8x vs 11.3x for Warrior Met Coal). Peabody Energy offers the higher dividend yield (1.20% vs 0.35%). Warrior Met Coal converts more of its revenue into profit, with a net margin of 4.4% versus -1.1%.
Summary generated from market data by MetaCap's automated system. Methodology
Relative performance
Percent change in share price from the first common trading day shown; excludes dividends.
Head-to-head
| Metric | BTU | HCC |
|---|---|---|
| Share price | $25.10 | $90.27 |
| Market cap | $3.06B | $4.77B |
| 1-day change | +1.01% | +0.78% |
| YTD return | -16.33% | +1.59% |
| 1-year return | -23.30% | +40.59% |
| 5-year return | +55.70% | +238.90% |
| P/E ratio (TTM) | — | 21.70 |
| Forward P/E | 8.80 | 11.25 |
| EPS (TTM) | $-1.49 | $4.16 |
| Dividend yield | 1.20% | 0.35% |
| Annual dividend | $0.30 | $0.32 |
| Revenue (latest FY) | $3.86B | $1.31B |
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -8.86% | -14.11% |
| Net income (latest FY) | $-42.50M | $57.00M |
| Gross margin | — | 25.01% |
| Operating margin | -2.07% | 3.49% |
| Net margin | -1.10% | 4.35% |
| 52-week high | $41.14 | $111.42 |
| 52-week low | $20.06 | $61.87 |
| Distance from 52-week high | -38.99% | -18.99% |
| Analyst consensus | buy | buy |
| Avg. price target upside | +25.82% | +21.12% |
| Average volume | 2.34M | 628.86K |
| Shares outstanding | 121.90M | 52.80M |
| Employees | 5,400 | 1,485 |
| Sector | Energy | Energy |
| Industry | Coal Mining | Coal Mining |
Highlighted cells mark the higher value for growth, returns, margins and yield, and the lower value for P/E ratios. Highlighting is a mechanical comparison, not a recommendation.
Key differences
- HCC has outperformed BTU by 63.9 percentage points over the past year.
- Warrior Met Coal is more profitable, keeping 4.4 cents of every revenue dollar as net income versus -1.1 cents for Peabody Energy.
- Peabody Energy grew revenue faster in its latest fiscal year (-8.86% vs -14.11%).
About Peabody Energy
BTU stock →Peabody Energy Corporation engages in the production of metallurgical and thermal coal. It operates through Seaborne Thermal, Seaborne Metallurgical, Powder River Basin, and Other U.S.
Energy · Coal Mining · 5,400 employees
About Warrior Met Coal
HCC stock →Warrior Met Coal, Inc. engages in the production and export of non-thermal steelmaking coal for the steel production by metal manufacturers in Europe, South America, and Asia.
Energy · Coal Mining · 1,485 employees
BTU vs HCC FAQ
Which is bigger, Peabody Energy or Warrior Met Coal?
Warrior Met Coal (HCC) is larger, with a market capitalization of $4.77B compared with $3.06B for Peabody Energy (BTU).
Which stock has performed better over the past year, BTU or HCC?
HCC returned +40.59% over the past 12 months, compared with -23.30% for BTU (price return, excluding dividends). Past performance does not predict future results.
Which pays a higher dividend, Peabody Energy or Warrior Met Coal?
Peabody Energy has the higher yield at 1.20%, compared with 0.35% for Warrior Met Coal.
Are Peabody Energy and Warrior Met Coal in the same industry?
Yes. Both are classified in the Coal Mining industry within the Energy sector.