EQT (EQT) vs Texas Pacific Land (TPL)
Head-to-head comparison of performance, valuation, growth, profitability and dividends. Prices delayed 15 minutes; data as of Oct 8, 2026.
Summary
Texas Pacific Land (TPL) has outperformed EQT (EQT) over the past year, gaining 8.1% versus a loss of 8.5%. Over five years, EQT leads with a +164.1% price change compared with +154.6% for TPL. EQT is the larger company by market cap ($32.72 billion vs $23.85 billion), about 1.4 times the size.
On valuation, Texas Pacific Land trades at a lower forward P/E (4.7x vs 13.9x for EQT). EQT offers the higher dividend yield (1.25% vs 0.66%). Texas Pacific Land converts more of its revenue into profit, with a net margin of 60.3% versus 23.6%.
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 | EQT | TPL |
|---|---|---|
| Share price | $52.31 | $345.79 |
| Market cap | $32.72B | $23.85B |
| 1-day change | -0.30% | -2.64% |
| YTD return | -2.41% | +20.39% |
| 1-year return | -8.48% | +8.10% |
| 5-year return | +164.06% | +154.60% |
| P/E ratio (TTM) | 12.17 | 44.11 |
| Forward P/E | 13.87 | 4.73 |
| EPS (TTM) | $4.30 | $7.84 |
| Dividend yield | 1.25% | 0.66% |
| Annual dividend | $0.653 | $2.27 |
| Revenue (latest FY) | $8.64B | $798.19M |
| Revenue growth (YoY) | +63.92% | +13.09% |
| Net income (latest FY) | $2.04B | $481.38M |
| Gross margin | 82.28% | — |
| Operating margin | 37.59% | 74.19% |
| Net margin | 23.59% | 60.31% |
| 52-week high | $68.24 | $547.20 |
| 52-week low | $47.94 | $269.23 |
| Distance from 52-week high | -23.34% | -36.81% |
| Analyst consensus | strong_buy | none |
| Avg. price target upside | +28.45% | +28.11% |
| Average volume | 7.19M | 359.61K |
| Shares outstanding | 625.52M | 68.97M |
| Employees | 1,523 | 114 |
| Sector | Energy | Energy |
| Industry | Oil & Gas Production | Oil & Gas Production |
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
- TPL has outperformed EQT by 16.6 percentage points over the past year.
- Texas Pacific Land trades at a higher earnings multiple (44.1x vs 12.2x trailing P/E).
- Texas Pacific Land is more profitable, keeping 60.3 cents of every revenue dollar as net income versus 23.6 cents for EQT.
- EQT grew revenue faster in its latest fiscal year (+63.92% vs +13.09%).
About EQT
EQT stock →EQT Corporation engages in the exploration, production, gathering, and transmission of hydrocarbons and natural gas. The company sells natural gas, natural gas liquids, and oil to marketers, utilities, and industrial customers located in the Appalachian Basin.
Energy · Oil & Gas Production · 1,523 employees
About Texas Pacific Land
TPL stock →Texas Pacific Land Corporation engages in the land and resource management, and water services and operations businesses. The Land and Resource Management segment manages surface acres of land, and oil and gas royalty interest in Permian Basin.
Energy · Oil & Gas Production · 114 employees
EQT vs TPL FAQ
Which is bigger, EQT or Texas Pacific Land?
EQT (EQT) is larger, with a market capitalization of $32.72B compared with $23.85B for Texas Pacific Land (TPL).
Which stock has performed better over the past year, EQT or TPL?
TPL returned +8.10% over the past 12 months, compared with -8.48% for EQT (price return, excluding dividends). Past performance does not predict future results.
Which has the lower P/E ratio, EQT or TPL?
EQT has the lower trailing P/E at 12.2, versus 44.1 for TPL. A lower P/E is not by itself a sign of a better investment; it can reflect slower expected growth or higher risk.
Which pays a higher dividend, EQT or Texas Pacific Land?
EQT has the higher yield at 1.25%, compared with 0.66% for Texas Pacific Land.
Are EQT and Texas Pacific Land in the same industry?
Yes. Both are classified in the Oil & Gas Production industry within the Energy sector.