Conocophillips's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Conocophillips (COP) against its publicly traded competitors: sales growth, net income, profitability, valuation and market share, plus each peer's market capitalization, revenue, income and employees. Free below: the top 5 peers. Subscriber access adds the full competitor list and CSV downloads.
Key Findings: Conocophillips vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 63,345M vs 1,520,316M combined for tracked competitors (4.0% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+21.0% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs accelerating (+27.2%) for its tracked peer group.
- Growth: Conocophillips generated 36.8% revenue growth year over year in Q2 2026, vs 45.6% for its tracked competitors combined.
- Profitability: Its 20.5% net margin compares with 14.6% for the peer group.
- Scale: Conocophillips ranks #3 of 17 companies by market capitalization in the Oil & Gas Integrated Operations industry, holding 7.6% of industry market cap.
- Peer revenue share: Conocophillips accounted for 3.8% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, down from 4.1% a year earlier.
- Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $6.40M compares with $3.57M for the peer group (1.8x).
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
COP Sales vs. its Competitors, Q2 2026
Conocophillips reported revenue growth of 36.83 % year on year in Q2 2026, below its competitors' combined revenue growth of 45.57 %.
With a net margin of 20.45 %, Conocophillips achieved higher profitability than its competitors (14.59 %).
Conocophillips generated 3.81 % of the combined sales of its peer group, down from 4.05 % a year earlier.
Conocophillips vs. its Competitors, Q2 2026
Revenue growth, year on year
Net income growth, year on year
Net margin
Revenue run-rate vs trailing 12 months
TTM net margin
TTM = trailing twelve months. Run-rate annualizes the latest quarter (×4) and compares it to TTM. In millions of $. High-Confidence Competitors are named as a competitor directly in an SEC filing; Similar-Size Competitors are the closest peers by market-cap rank within the same industry; Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors are the closest peers by combined revenue growth, operating margin and ROIC, all independent of the competitor list.
TTM revenue, latest-quarter run-rate and net income/margin benchmarked across Conocophillips and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| Conocophillips | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar-Size Competitors (5) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across Conocophillips's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
For context: the Oil & Gas Integrated Operations industry grew revenue 22.6% year over year, combined, vs 36.8% for Conocophillips. Conocophillips's share of combined industry revenue moved from 1.34% to 1.49%, a gain of 0.15 percentage points.
Conocophillips's Competitor Quality Breadth
Share of each group, trailing 12 months: profitable (net margin > 0), expanding (revenue growth > 0), growing faster than the industry's own median, and financially distressed (Piotroski F-Score of 2 or below).
| Entity | Profitable | Expanding | Above Industry Growth | Distressed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conocophillips | Yes | Yes | No | No |
| Competitors combined (99) | ||||
| Similar-Size Competitors (7) |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Altman Z-Score is not shown here: it is not populated in the underlying data for any company. Percentages are of companies in each group that report the relevant metric, not of the full group size.
COP Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
COP Stock Performance relative to Similar-Size Competitors
5 Best-Performing Tracked Competitors, Trailing 12 Months
| # | Competitor | TTM Share Price Return | vs U.S.A. 500 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Blue Dolphin Energy Co | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 2 | Calumet Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 3 | Zion Oil and Gas Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 4 | Valero Energy Corp | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 5 | Pbf Energy Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Conocophillips's best-performing tracked competitors requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.
Conocophillips's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers
We compete with numerous other companies in the industry, including state-owned companies, to locate and obtain new sources of supply and to produce oil, bitumen, natural gas liquids and natural gas in an efficient, cost-effective manner. Based on statistics published of the Oil and Gas Journal, we had the third-largest worldwide liquids and natural gas reserves for U.S.-based oil and gas companies. We deliver our production into the worldwide commodity markets. Principal methods of competing include geological, geophysical and engineering research and technology; experience and expertise; economic analysis in connection with portfolio management; and safely operating oil and gas producing properties.
Publicly Traded Peers of Conocophillips
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
| Conocophillips | 153,044.70 | 63,345.00 |
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | 678,400.22 | 368,757.00 |
| Chevron Corp | 407,361.69 | 215,261.00 |
| Shell Plc | 286,930.72 | 266,886.00 |
| Totalenergies Se | 199,342.93 | 162,863.00 |
| Valero Energy Corp | 114,533.58 | 139,397.00 |
| SUBTOTAL | 3,383,434.12 | 2,768,485.28 |
Sign in to see all competitors of Conocophillips.
Sources: Conocophillips's official press releases and regulatory filings; CSIMarket.com's market research; and the financial filings and press releases of the other companies cited.
Updated on:
Focus of this report: publicly traded companies. Ten additional tables on Conocophillips versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
Conocophillips's Competitors Named by the Company
Competitive relationships identified from SEC filings and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.| Competitor | Basis | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Valero Energy Corp | Named by the company | 85% |
Filing basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Conocophillips's named competitors require a Commercial License.
Methodology: relationships are extracted from SEC filings (named-competitor disclosures) and corroborating sources. Named by the company = explicitly disclosed as a competitor; Inferred = derived from corroborating signals. Confidence reflects evidence strength.
Conocophillips's Business Segment Mix vs Peers
Revenue by operating segment or division, as named and reported by each company. Segment names are the filer's own and are not standardized across companies. Do not assume a same-named or similarly-named segment is defined identically between two companies. Shares are of each company's own total revenue and are not required to sum to 100% (intersegment revenue, unallocated items).| Company | Largest Segment |
|---|---|
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | Corporate and Unallocated 0.20 % |
| Chevron Corp | Reportable Segment, Aggregation before Other Operating 99.73 % |
| Valero Energy Corp | Refining 95.14 % |
| Marathon Petroleum Corporation | Refining and Marketing 94.83 % |
| Phillips 66 | Refining 69.25 % |
Source: operating segment revenue as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API, leaf-level reportable segments only (parent roll-up segments are excluded where sub-segments are separately disclosed).
Conocophillips's Productivity vs Peers Comparison
Revenue and income per employee, trailing 12 months, in $; market cap in millions of $| Company | Market Cap | Revenue / Employee | Income / Employee |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conocophillips | 153,045 | 6,398,485 | 936,263 |
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | 678,400 | 6,357,879 | 575,414 |
| Chevron Corp | 407,362 | 5,001,533 | 487,116 |
| Shell Plc | 286,931 | 3,139,835 | 213,165 |
| Totalenergies Se | 199,343 | 17,683,279 | 1,450,271 |
| Valero Energy Corp | 114,534 | 14,208,236 | 777,699 |
| PEERS TOTAL | 3,230,389 | 3,569,366 | 284,924 |
Conocophillips's Geographic Revenue Exposure vs Peers
Revenue by country/region as reported in each company's most recent filing. Disclosure granularity varies by filer (some report by country, others by broad region) and is shown as disclosed.| Company | Largest Market |
|---|---|
| Phillips 66 | United States 79.26 % |
| Sea Limited | Southeast Asia excluding Singapore 62.69 % |
| Occidental Petroleum Corporation | Non-US 20.75 % |
| Sharkninja Inc | North America 64.87 % |
| Broadridge Financial Solutions Inc | United States 85.26 % |
Source: revenue geography as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API. Percentages are of that company's own total consolidated revenue for its most recent reported period.
Conocophillips's Position in Industry Market Structure
Market-capitalization share and concentration across all 17 companies in Conocophillips's industry classification, broader than the peer set above. Market cap in millions of $.Conocophillips ranks #3 of 17 companies by market capitalization in its industry, holding 7.63 % of total industry market cap. The industry's Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) is 1,807, indicating a moderately concentrated market structure (U.S. antitrust guidance: below 1,500 unconcentrated, 1,500 to 2,500 moderately concentrated, above 2,500 highly concentrated).
| Rank | Company | Market Cap | Industry Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Exxon Mobil Corporation | 678,400 | 33.84 % |
| 2 | Chevron Corp | 407,362 | 20.32 % |
| 3 | Conocophillips | 153,045 | 7.63 % |
| 4 | Bp Plc | 131,444 | 6.56 % |
| 5 | Valero Energy Corp | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 6 | Marathon Petroleum Corporation | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 7 | Equinor Asa | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 8 | Phillips 66 | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 9 | Suncor Energy inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 10 | Imperial Oil Limited | 1,234 | 5.2% |
Market cap and industry share for the rest of Conocophillips's industry peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation) across CSIMarket's industry classification, market capitalization as of 2026-09-28.
Conocophillips's Same-Size Peers & Stock Performance
Peers chosen by closeness in market-cap rank within the same industry classification (not the named-competitor list above). Trailing 12-month total return, 3-month price momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio vs the broad U.S. market.| Rank | Company | Market Cap | TTM Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Exxon Mobil Corporation | 678,400 | 40.86 % |
| 2 | Chevron Corp | 407,362 | 28.48 % |
| 3 | Conocophillips | 153,045 | 32.04 % |
| 4 | Bp Plc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 5 | Valero Energy Corp | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 6 | Marathon Petroleum Corporation | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 7 | Equinor Asa | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 8 | Phillips 66 | 1,234 | 12.3% |
Market cap, return, momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio for the rest of Conocophillips's same-size peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation); returns and risk metrics as of 2026-09-28. Beta and Sharpe ratio are versus the broad U.S. equity market, not this industry.
Conocophillips's Profitability & Cost Structure
Trailing 12-month margins from SEC-filed financials. Operating margin is compared to the Oil & Gas Integrated Operations industry median; gross margin, EBITDA margin and capital intensity are compared to the live industry average (22 companies).| Metric | Company | Industry | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | 62.04 % | 31.37 % (avg) | +30.7 pp |
| Operating Margin | - | industry median | - |
| EBITDA Margin | 42.69 % | 18.65 % (avg) | +24.0 pp |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | 0.00 % | 5.12 % (avg) | -5.1 pp |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. SG&A and R&D as a share of revenue have limited coverage as this data is backfilled and appear only where reported. Higher capital intensity is not inherently negative; it reflects the industry's asset requirements.
Conocophillips's Valuation vs Competitive Position
Valuation multiples vs the Oil & Gas Integrated Operations industry average (22 companies, excluding loss-making/negative-equity outliers), alongside returns on capital for context on whether a premium or discount lines up with measurably stronger or weaker returns.| Metric | Company | Industry Average | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| P/E | 15.2x | 16.5x | -1.3x |
| EV / EBITDA | 6.0x | 8.1x | -2.2x |
| P/B | 2.2x | 2.9x | -0.7x |
| Return on Equity | 14.30 % | industry aggregate | -0.51 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | - | 8.14 % (avg) | - |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. A valuation premium or discount is not, by itself, a judgment of over- or under-valuation. Compare it against the return and growth context shown elsewhere on this page.
Conocophillips's Multi-Year Financial Trajectory
Fiscal-year revenue growth, operating margin, return on invested capital and P/E, as reported in SEC filings.| Metric | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | 18.85 % | -5.31 % | -47.49 % | 151.09 % | 62.35 % | -28.48 % | -2.49 % | 7.67 % |
| Operating Margin | 42.00 % | 40.20 % | 11.20 % | 42.44 % | 44.29 % | 43.73 % | 42.91 % | 39.13 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 17.19 % | 15.08 % | 2.41 % | 16.88 % | 26.67 % | 18.83 % | 16.17 % | 13.12 % |
| P/E | 0.0x | 0.1x | - | 14.9x | 8.3x | 12.6x | 13.3x | 14.8x |
Source: CSIMarket API, fiscal-year figures. P/E is this company's own historical ratio at each fiscal year end and can swing sharply around an earnings trough: that is real, not a data error.
Conocophillips's BCG Growth-Share Matrix
Relative market share (vs Conocophillips's largest competitor by market cap) against industry revenue growth, using the standard textbook thresholds (1.0x share, 10% growth) a common framework, not a precision instrument.
Conocophillips falls in the Question Mark quadrant: relative market share of 0.23x vs its largest competitor, in an industry growing revenue 12.6% (median, trailing 12 months).
Source: CSIMarket API (market-cap share and industry revenue growth). The 10% growth and 1.0x share lines are standard textbook thresholds, not derived from this industry's own distribution.
Conocophillips's Competitive Forces (Porter's Five Forces)
Only the forces this data can support honestly are shown; the other three are marked as such rather than guessed.| Force | Assessment | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Competitive Rivalry | Moderate | Industry HHI of 1,807 (see Industry Market Structure & Concentration above) |
| Barriers to Entry | Lower than typical for the industry | Capital intensity (capex / revenue) of 0.00 % vs industry average 5.12 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above) |
| Supplier Power | Not covered on this page | See Conocophillips's dedicated suppliers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Buyer Power | Not covered on this page | See Conocophillips's dedicated customers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Threat of Substitutes | - | No systematic data source for cross-product substitution exists in this system; not estimated |
Note: this is a partial, data-grounded application of the framework, not a complete strategic assessment. Rivalry and barriers-to-entry readings are mechanical translations of the HHI and capital-intensity figures shown elsewhere on this page, not independent judgments.
Conocophillips's Industry Attractiveness & Competitive Strength
A CSIMarket composite, not a standard field: each axis is an equal-weighted average of three factors already shown elsewhere on this page (industry growth, industry profitability and rivalry for attractiveness; relative market share, profitability and growth vs industry for strength). Disclosed as a designed methodology, not a precision measurement.
Conocophillips falls in the Medium attractiveness / Medium strength cell: Selective.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Each axis score is a simple 1(low)/2(medium)/3(high) average across its three inputs -- a transparent, disclosed simplification, not a validated academic scoring model.
Conocophillips's SWOT
Every point below is a fixed rule applied to a metric already shown elsewhere on this page (Market Structure, Profitability, Valuation, Run-Rate, Stock Performance, Quality Breadth) not an independent strategic assessment. A blank quadrant means no rule was met, not that none apply.Strengths
- Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+21.0% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
- Outperforming the U.S.A. 500 over the trailing 12 months.
Weaknesses
- Low relative market share vs the industry leader (0.23x).
Opportunities
- Industry revenue growing at a healthy 12.6% median pace.
Threats
No rule matched.
Methodology: mechanical, rule-based SWOT. Each bullet reuses a figure already sourced and cited elsewhere on this page; nothing here is generated narrative or independent analyst judgment.
Conocophillips's Financial Strength vs Peers Comparison
Quick ratio, working capital, debt to equity and asset turnover, trailing 12 months| Company | Quick Ratio | Working Capital | Debt / Equity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conocophillips | 0.49 | 1.36 | 0.45 |
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | 0.13 | 1.11 | 0.17 |
| Chevron Corp | 0.01 | 1.16 | 0.21 |
| Shell Plc | 0.37 | 1.30 | 0.05 |
| Totalenergies Se | 0.28 | 0.97 | 0.02 |
| Valero Energy Corp | 0.35 | 1.61 | 0.32 |
Quick ratio = cash / current liabilities; working capital ratio = current assets / current liabilities; asset turnover = revenue / total assets. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Conocophillips's Revenue and Income Growth vs Peers
Quarterly revenue and net income growth, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Revenue Y/Y | Income Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conocophillips | Q2 2026 | +36.8 % | +98.8 % |
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | Q2 2026 | +42.3 % | +97.5 % |
| Chevron Corp | Q2 2026 | +56.3 % | +385.6 % |
| Shell Plc | Q4 2025 | -6.1 % | +9.7 % |
| Totalenergies Se | Q4 2025 | -7.1 % | -16.7 % |
| Valero Energy Corp | Q2 2026 | +48.8 % | +514.3 % |
| PEERS TOTAL | +7.4 % | +59.2 % |
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Conocophillips's Peers' Costs of Sales and Capital Expenditures
Context for revenue growth: peer costs and capex, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Costs Y/Y | Capex Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conocophillips | Q2 2026 | +32.0 % | - |
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | Q2 2026 | - | +3.9 % |
| Chevron Corp | Q2 2026 | +36.3 % | +22.3 % |
| Shell Plc | Q4 2025 | - | - |
| Totalenergies Se | Q4 2025 | - | - |
| Valero Energy Corp | Q2 2026 | +36.2 % | - |
Conocophillips's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conocophillips | 7.55% | 8.36% | 14.30% |
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | 7.29% | 7.92% | 12.57% |
| Chevron Corp | 6.40% | 6.49% | 10.85% |
| Shell Plc | 4.89% | 4.22% | 10.33% |
| Totalenergies Se | 4.59% | 11.37% | 11.37% |
| Valero Energy Corp | 12.54% | 16.22% | 28.12% |
ROA = net income / total assets; ROI = net income / investments; ROE = net income / equity; turnover ratios use trailing 12 month revenue (receivables) and cost of sales (inventory).
Conocophillips's Valuation vs Peers
P/E, price to sales, PEG, price to cash flow and price to book| Company | P/E | Price / Sales |
|---|---|---|
| Conocophillips | 16.72 | 2.42 |
| Exxon Mobil Corporation | 20.97 | 1.84 |
| Chevron Corp | 19.59 | 1.89 |
| Shell Plc | 16.09 | 1.08 |
| Totalenergies Se | 15.19 | 1.22 |
| Valero Energy Corp | 16.21 | 0.82 |
| PEERS AVERAGE | 15.02 | 1.22 |
P/E = price / diluted EPS (trailing 12 months); PEG = P/E divided by EPS growth; the average row divides the peers' combined market cap by their combined income, sales, cash flow and equity.