The Southern's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of The Southern (SO) 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: The Southern vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 30,174M vs 473,838M combined for tracked competitors (6.0% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+11.3% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs accelerating (+14.9%) for its tracked peer group.
- Growth: The Southern generated 8.0% revenue growth year over year in Q1 2026, vs 15.5% for its tracked competitors combined.
- Profitability: Its 15.9% net margin compares with 13.5% for the peer group.
- Scale: The Southern ranks #3 of 74 companies by market capitalization in the Electric Utilities industry, holding 6.9% of industry market cap.
- Peer revenue share: The Southern accounted for 5.8% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, down from 6.2% a year earlier.
- Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $1.01M compares with $1.19M for the peer group (0.9x).
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
SO Sales vs. its Competitors, Q1 2026
The Southern reported revenue growth of 8.00 % year on year in Q1 2026, below its competitors' combined revenue growth of 15.54 %.
With a net margin of 15.93 %, The Southern achieved higher profitability than its competitors (13.53 %).
The Southern generated 5.81 % of the combined sales of its peer group, down from 6.19 % a year earlier.
The Southern vs. its Competitors, Q1 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 The Southern and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| The Southern Company | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| High-Confidence Competitors (8) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar-Size Competitors (7) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar Growth & Profitability (5) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across The Southern's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
For context: the Electric Utilities industry grew revenue 13.3% year over year, combined, vs 8.0% for The Southern. The Southern's share of combined industry revenue moved from 1.87% to 1.79%, a loss of 0.09 percentage points.
The Southern'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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Southern Company | Yes | Yes | No | No |
| Competitors combined (30) | ||||
| High-Confidence Competitors (12) | ||||
| Similar-Size Competitors (7) | ||||
| Similar Growth & Profitability (8) | 100.00 % (8 of 8) | 100.00 % (8 of 8) | 50.00 % (4 of 8) | 0.00 % (0 of 8) |
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.
SO Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
SO Stock Performance relative to High-Confidence Competitors
SO Stock Performance relative to Similar-Size Competitors
SO Stock Performance relative to Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors
5 Best-Performing Tracked Competitors, Trailing 12 Months
| # | Competitor | TTM Share Price Return | vs U.S.A. 500 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Oneok Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 2 | The Aes Corporation | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 3 | American Electric Power Co Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 4 | Williams companies inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 5 | Entergy Corporation | 282.9% | Outperformed |
TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for The Southern's best-performing tracked competitors requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.
The Southern's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers
Publicly Traded Peers of The Southern Company
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
| The Southern Company | 93,043.08 | 30,174.00 |
| Constellation Energy Corporation | 95,112.72 | 29,867.00 |
| Duke Energy Corporation | 88,369.76 | 33,166.00 |
| Williams companies inc | 83,802.25 | 12,204.00 |
| American Electric Power Co Inc | 64,962.67 | 22,432.60 |
| Nu Holdings Ltd | 60,335.89 | 15,774.74 |
| SUBTOTAL | 1,173,579.15 | 520,400.81 |
Sign in to see all competitors of The Southern Company.
Sources: The Southern Company'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 The Southern Company versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
The Southern's Competitors Named by the Company
Competitive relationships identified from SEC filings and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.| Competitor | Basis | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Jrsis Health Care Corp | Named by the company | 85% |
| Air Transport Services Group Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Genie Energy Ltd | Named by the company | 85% |
| Mississippi Power | Named by the company | 85% |
| American Superconductor Corp | Named by the company | 85% |
| 1stdibs com Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Oxford Industries Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Biglari Holdings Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Inspire Veterinary Partners Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| American Public Education Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Fuel Tech Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Sun Country Airlines Holdings Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| United Breweries Co Inc | Named by the company | 85% |
| Pg and e Corp | Named by the company | 85% |
Filing basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for The Southern'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.
The Southern'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 |
|---|---|
| Williams companies inc | Transmission And Gulf Of Mexico 44.10 % |
| American Electric Power Co Inc | Vertically Integrated Utilities 57.14 % |
| Oneok Inc | Refined Products and Crude Oil 59.21 % |
| Entergy Corporation | Utility 99.46 % |
| Xcel Energy Inc | Regulated Electric 42.53 % |
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).
Sign in to see all peers for The Southern Company.
The Southern'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Southern Company | 93,043 | 1,012,550 | 142,248 |
| Constellation Energy Corporation | 95,113 | 1,947,128 | 247,539 |
| Duke Energy Corporation | 88,370 | 1,254,340 | 198,328 |
| Williams companies inc | 83,802 | 2,038,417 | 541,841 |
| American Electric Power Co Inc | 64,963 | 1,275,957 | 215,960 |
| Nu Holdings Ltd | 60,336 | 1,573,226 | 286,394 |
| PEERS TOTAL | 1,080,536 | 1,185,856 | 152,807 |
Sign in to see all peers for The Southern Company.
The Southern's Position in Industry Market Structure
Market-capitalization share and concentration across all 65 companies in The Southern's industry classification, broader than the peer set above. Market cap in millions of $.The Southern ranks #3 of 65 companies by market capitalization in its industry, holding 6.90 % of total industry market cap. The industry's Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) is 440, indicating a unconcentrated 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 | Nextera Energy Inc | 157,223 | 11.66 % |
| 2 | Constellation Energy Corporation | 95,113 | 7.05 % |
| 3 | The Southern Company | 93,043 | 6.90 % |
| 4 | Duke Energy Corporation | 88,370 | 6.55 % |
| 5 | American Electric Power Co Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 6 | Dominion Energy Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 7 | Sempra | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 8 | Vistra Corp | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 9 | Entergy Corporation | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 10 | Xcel Energy Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
Market cap and industry share for the rest of The Southern's industry peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation) across CSIMarket's industry classification, market capitalization as of 2026-09-29.
The Southern'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 | Nextera Energy Inc | 157,223 | -0.94 % |
| 2 | Constellation Energy Corporation | 95,113 | -18.89 % |
| 3 | The Southern Company | 93,043 | -12.74 % |
| 4 | Duke Energy Corporation | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 5 | American Electric Power Co Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 6 | Dominion Energy Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 7 | Sempra | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 8 | Vistra Corp | 1,234 | 12.3% |
Market cap, return, momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio for the rest of The Southern's same-size peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation); returns and risk metrics as of 2026-09-29. Beta and Sharpe ratio are versus the broad U.S. equity market, not this industry.
The Southern's Profitability & Cost Structure
Trailing 12-month margins from SEC-filed financials. Operating margin is compared to the Electric Utilities industry median; gross margin, EBITDA margin and capital intensity are compared to the live industry average (83 companies). See the full Electric Utilities industry profitability benchmarks.| Metric | Company | Industry | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross Margin | - | 58.29 % (avg) | - |
| Operating Margin | 32.94 % | industry median | +12.5 pp |
| EBITDA Margin | 39.55 % | 27.06 % (avg) | +12.5 pp |
| Capital Intensity (Capex / Revenue) | 43.89 % | 34.89 % (avg) | +9.0 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.
The Southern's Valuation vs Competitive Position
Valuation multiples vs the Electric Utilities industry average (83 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. See the full Electric Utilities industry valuation benchmarks.| Metric | Company | Industry Average | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| P/E | 24.3x | 24.9x | -0.6x |
| EV / EBITDA | 14.8x | 16.1x | -1.2x |
| P/B | 2.8x | 2.1x | +0.7x |
| Return on Equity | 10.98 % | industry aggregate | 0.15 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 5.14 % | 2.48 % (avg) | 2.66 % |
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.
The Southern's Multi-Year Financial Trajectory
Fiscal-year revenue growth, operating margin, return on invested capital and P/E, as reported in SEC filings.| Metric | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | -5.30 % | 13.61 % | 15.91 % | 2.01 % | -8.84 % | -4.87 % | 5.83 % | 10.58 % |
| Operating Margin | 24.48 % | 23.26 % | 11.08 % | 17.84 % | 36.12 % | 23.98 % | 26.45 % | 33.61 % |
| Return on Invested Capital | 6.65 % | 3.99 % | 2.07 % | 3.25 % | 5.62 % | 3.40 % | 4.56 % | 5.33 % |
| P/E | 17.7x | 19.1x | 58.5x | 21.3x | 14.1x | 20.7x | 21.3x | 22.5x |
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.
The Southern's Strategic Group Map
Every company in The Southern's industry and named-competitor list, plotted by trailing 12-month revenue growth and operating margin. The Southern is shown in red; its closest peers by combined growth, margin and ROIC (the Similar Growth & Profitability group above) are labeled.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Extreme outlier values (from near-zero-revenue companies) are excluded from the plotted cloud but never from the highlighted company or its labeled peers.
The Southern's BCG Growth-Share Matrix
Relative market share (vs The Southern'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.
The Southern falls in the Dog quadrant: relative market share of 0.59x vs its largest competitor, in an industry growing revenue 8.9% (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.
The Southern'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 | High | Industry HHI of 440 (see Industry Market Structure & Concentration above) |
| Barriers to Entry | High (capital intensive) | Capital intensity (capex / revenue) of 43.89 % vs industry average 34.89 % (see Profitability & Cost Structure above) |
| Supplier Power | Not covered on this page | See The Southern's dedicated suppliers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Buyer Power | Not covered on this page | See The Southern'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.
The Southern'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.
The Southern 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.
The Southern'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
- Operating margin 12.5 points above the industry median.
- Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+11.3% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
Weaknesses
- Underperforming the U.S.A. 500 over the trailing 12 months.
Opportunities
- Trades at a lower P/E than the industry average (24.3x vs 24.9x) despite a higher return on invested capital -- a possible re-rating opportunity.
Threats
- High capital intensity requires continuous reinvestment just to keep pace with the industry.
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.
The Southern'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Southern Company | 0.11 | 0.70 | 1.86 |
| Constellation Energy Corporation | 0.32 | 1.46 | 0.63 |
| Duke Energy Corporation | 0.04 | 0.62 | 1.66 |
| Williams companies inc | - | 0.54 | 1.94 |
| American Electric Power Co Inc | 0.04 | 0.55 | 1.51 |
| Nu Holdings Ltd | - | - | - |
Sign in to see all peers for The Southern Company.
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.
The Southern'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Southern Company | Q1 2026 | +8.0 % | +0.3 % |
| Constellation Energy Corporation | Q1 2026 | +63.8 % | +1,142.6 % |
| Duke Energy Corporation | Q1 2026 | +11.3 % | +12.3 % |
| Williams companies inc | Q2 2026 | +9.8 % | +50.3 % |
| American Electric Power Co Inc | Q1 2026 | +10.2 % | +12.6 % |
| Nu Holdings Ltd | Q4 2025 | +37.0 % | +45.6 % |
| PEERS TOTAL | +15.1 % | +32.3 % |
Sign in to see all peers for The Southern Company.
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
The Southern'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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Southern Company | Q1 2026 | +2.1 % | +20.8 % |
| Constellation Energy Corporation | Q1 2026 | +15.2 % | +58.2 % |
| Duke Energy Corporation | Q1 2026 | +16.9 % | +29.9 % |
| Williams companies inc | Q2 2026 | - | +88.7 % |
| American Electric Power Co Inc | Q1 2026 | +14.3 % | - |
| Nu Holdings Ltd | Q4 2025 | - | - |
Sign in to see all peers for The Southern Company.
The Southern's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Southern Company | 2.76% | 2.74% | 10.98% |
| Constellation Energy Corporation | 5.77% | 5.64% | 19.68% |
| Duke Energy Corporation | 2.70% | 3.54% | 9.79% |
| Williams companies inc | 5.53% | 6.55% | 21.49% |
| American Electric Power Co Inc | 3.37% | 3.75% | 11.90% |
| Nu Holdings Ltd | 3.83% | 3.74% | 25.36% |
Sign in to see all peers for The Southern Company.
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).
The Southern's Valuation vs Peers
P/E, price to sales, PEG, price to cash flow and price to book| Company | P/E | Price / Sales |
|---|---|---|
| The Southern Company | 21.10 | 3.08 |
| Constellation Energy Corporation | 23.34 | 3.18 |
| Duke Energy Corporation | 17.38 | 2.66 |
| Williams companies inc | 27.25 | 6.87 |
| American Electric Power Co Inc | 17.51 | 2.90 |
| Nu Holdings Ltd | 57.97 | 3.82 |
| PEERS AVERAGE | 17.41 | 2.26 |
Sign in to see all peers for The Southern Company.
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.