Gulfport Energy Corporation (GPOR): what the price requires
The current priced-in claim for Gulfport Energy Corporation (GPOR) is temporarily suppressed because the live engine record is unavailable. The dated report remains a snapshot, not a current market read.
Generated: 2026-07-19 · Source: https://boothcheck.com/report/GPOR
Headline
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Ticker | GPOR |
| Company | Gulfport Energy Corporation |
| Current price | $154.54/sh |
What The Price Requires (Inversion)
The assumption today's price embeds, recovered by inverting the valuation.
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Inversion basis | whole-company |
| Operating margin needed | 13.3% |
| Operating margin today | 44.4% |
| Margin compression implied | -31.1pp |
| Multiple paid | 6x operating income |
The operating-margin requirement is derived from the framework's value band at year 9, a separately labeled basis from the headline growth/duration solve.
The price sits below what even a 5%/yr operating-profit decline would warrant; the inversion reports a bound, not a solved growth path.
Solve inputs: computed at a 8.8% cost of capital with 4% terminal growth over a 5-year stage.
How unusual the bet is: within-range
| Reference | Value |
|---|---|
| vs own history | +0.33σ |
| cohort percentile (of 45 peers) | 2 |
| implied end-window share | 0% |
Valuation X-Ray
The price is supported by asset-based and earnings-power and relative-multiple and growth-DCF value. A value/asset-supported name, not a pure growth bet.
How the valuation models price the stock relative to the market price. Price/FV above 1.0 means the market pays more than that lens defends (expensive); at or below 1.0 the lens can defend the price.
| Family | Median price/FV | Models | Reads |
|---|---|---|---|
| Asset | 0.45x | 5 | justifies |
| Earnings | 0.39x | 4 | justifies |
| Relative | 0.48x | 5 | justifies |
| Growth | 0.35x | 3 | justifies |
Families that justify the price: Asset, Earnings, Relative, Growth
The models below discount at their own flat-beta convention rates (cost of equity 9.3%, WACC 7.5%); the inversion above states its own rate.
Per-Model Detail (n=17)
| Model | Family | FV | Price/FV | Applicable | Methodology |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DCF Perpetual Growth | Growth | $2294.11 | 0.07x | yes | FCF base $0.9B, growth 25% (input: historical growth), terminal g 4.0%, WACC 7.5%, 5yr projection |
| DCF Exit Multiple | Growth | $437.71 | 0.35x | yes | Exit EV/EBITDA: 4.0x / 3.3x / 8.3x (bear / base = today's held flat / bull), 5yr |
| Relative Valuation | Relative | $310.74 | 0.50x | yes | P/E 7.94x (blended: static sector reference 10x + trailing (TTM) 5x), scenarios: 6.0x / 7.9x / 9.5x (bear / base = reference held flat / bull), EV/EBITDA 6x |
| Simple DDM | Growth | — | — | no | — |
| Two-Stage DDM | Growth | — | — | no | — |
| Simple Excess Return | Asset | $343.55 | 0.45x | yes | BV/sh $96.69, ROE (TTM) 32.9%, ke 9.3% |
| Two-Stage Excess Return | Asset | $680.97 | 0.23x | yes | 5yr excess ROE then converge to ke=9.3% |
| Discounted Future Market Cap | Growth | $224.24 | 0.69x | yes | Rev $1.7B, growth 30% (input: historical growth; tapered), Terminal P/S: 1.3x / 1.7x / 2.1x (bear / base = today's held flat / bull, cap 6x) |
| Peter Lynch Fair Value | Relative | $365.04 | 0.42x | yes | EPS $30.42, growth 2% (input: historical EPS growth), PEG=2.43 (Overvalued) |
| Margin Trajectory | Growth | — | — | no | — |
| Earnings Power Value | Earnings | $153.96 | 1.00x | yes | Normalized EBIT (5y avg op income, one-time charges added back) $0.35B × (1−21%) / WACC 7.5% → EPV (no growth) |
| Residual Income | Asset | $530.86 | 0.29x | yes | BV $96.69 + 5yr PV of (ROE (TTM) 32.9% − Kₑ 9.3%) × BV; BV grows 8.8%/yr |
| Graham Number | Asset | $257.26 | 0.60x | yes | √(22.5 × EPS $30.42 × BVPS $96.69) — Graham's conservative floor |
| EV/EBITDA Relative | Relative | $318.73 | 0.48x | yes | EBITDA $1.13B × sector EV/EBITDA 6.0x |
| FCF Yield | Earnings | $487.41 | 0.32x | yes | FCF $918.8M / Kₑ 9.3% — zero-growth perpetuity |
| SBC-Adj FCF Yield | Earnings | — | — | no | — |
| Ben Graham Formula | Earnings | $981.55 | 0.16x | yes | EPS $30.42 × (8.5 + 2×15.0%) × (4.4 / 5.3%) |
| ROIC-Justified P/B | Asset | $87.65 | 1.76x | yes | BV $96.69 × (ROIC 6.8% / WACC 7.5%) |
| P/Sales Sector | Relative | $106.75 | 1.45x | yes | Revenue $1.66B × sector P/S 1.2x |
| PEG Fair Value | Relative | $1140.75 | 0.14x | yes | EPS $30.42 × (PEG 1.5 × growth 25.0% (input: historical EPS growth)) → PE 37.5x |
| Earnings Yield | Earnings | $328.86 | 0.47x | yes | EPS $30.42 / required return 9.3% (Rf 4.3% + ERP 5.0%) |
| Funds From Operations Multiple | Relative | — | — | no | — |
| Clinical Phase NPV | Growth | — | — | no | — |
| Merton | Asset | — | — | no | — |
| V5 Mechanical | — | — | — | no | — |
Solvency
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Net debt | $820.8m |
| Net debt / NOPAT (after-tax) | 1.60x |
| Net debt / operating income (pre-tax) | 1.26x |
| Interest coverage | 11.6x |
| Share count CAGR (buyback) | -3.1% |
| Burning cash | no |
Bullet Takeaways
- Almost every valuation method lands above the $161.14 price. The relative method sits near $350, the asset-based methods between $343 and $681, and even the conservative discounted-future-market-cap method near $234, with a central blended read near $404.
- The balance sheet is built for capital return: about $821 million of gross debt against strong cash flow, interest coverage near 14.5x, and a share-repurchase program that has retired roughly 43% of the share count since 2021.
- The catch is the commodity cycle. Current operating margin near 49% reflects favorable natural gas prices, and first-quarter revenue more than doubled to $437.5 million on higher prices and production, so the question is how durable those prices and that margin are.
Bull Case
The balance sheet is the best entry into Gulfport, because it tells you how management thinks about a volatile commodity business. The company carries only about $821 million of gross debt against operating cash flow that reached $292.9 million in a single quarter, so interest coverage sits near 14.5x and the company is in no danger from its leverage. That conservative structure is deliberate, and it is what gives management the confidence to return cash aggressively rather than hoard it or chase growth. The repurchase program has retired roughly 43% of the share count since 2021, an extraordinary reduction that compounds per-share value directly, and the company bought back another $172.8 million of stock in the first quarter alone. When a low-leverage producer shrinks its share count by nearly half over a few years, every barrel of future cash flow is spread across far fewer shares.
The operating results show the cash engine running hot. First-quarter revenue more than doubled to $437.5 million from $197.0 million a year earlier, net income reached $165.8 million against a small prior-year loss, and operating cash flow climbed to $292.9 million, all driven by higher natural gas prices and increased production. Net daily production averaged 996.8 MMcfe, primarily from the Utica and Marcellus, at roughly 91% natural gas. Operational efficiency keeps improving, with an 8% gain in Utica top-hole drilling days and a 20% improvement in Marcellus footage drilled per day, which lowers the cost of each new well. The company also installed a respected operator, naming former Expand Energy chief Domenic Dell'Osso as incoming president and CEO, signaling continued discipline.
The valuation and the demand backdrop both favor the bull. Nearly every method lands above the price: the relative method near $350, the asset-based methods between $343 and $681, the EV/EBITDA method near $319, with a central blended read near $404, all against a $161 price (June 27, 2026). The company has hedged a portion of expected 2026 gas production at an average floor of $3.74 per Mcf, protecting downside, and its 2026 capital program is a modest $400 million to $430 million (FY2025 10-K, accession 0001628280-26-011487). The macro tailwind is the U.S. LNG export buildout, with feedgas demand running about 19% above the prior year, plus emerging power-project demand from data centers, both of which support natural gas prices. Analysts see the gap, with a Moderate Buy consensus and an average target near $239, well above the current price.
Bear Case
The bear case is a sector-cycle observation, and it is the one fact the deep-value methods quietly ignore: Gulfport's earnings are a function of the natural gas price, and the current numbers reflect a favorable point in that cycle, not a sustainable baseline. Operating margin near 49% and a revenue line that more than doubled year over year are not the steady state of a commodity producer; they are what happens when gas prices and production both rise together. Natural gas is a notoriously volatile commodity that fell to around $3.29 per MMBtu in late June, and a warm winter, a production surge across the Appalachian basin, or a stall in LNG export growth could send prices and Gulfport's cash flow sharply lower. The methods that mark the stock cheap are capitalizing peak-ish earnings, and a low multiple on a high earnings base is not the bargain it appears to be when the base is cyclical.
The asset value that anchors the bull case is itself a function of commodity price assumptions. The excess-return and reserve-based methods that land at $343 to $681 depend on the value of proved reserves, which is calculated using a price deck; lower forward gas prices reduce that value directly, and the spread among the methods, from $234 to over $2,000, signals how sensitive the answer is to the inputs. The hedge at a $3.74 floor protects only a portion of 2026 production, so the unhedged volumes and the years beyond 2026 are exposed to whatever the market delivers. A company can be conservatively financed and still see its equity value compress hard if the commodity that drives its revenue rolls over.
The capital-return story, while genuine, has limits in a downturn. Buying back 43% of the share count was possible because cash flow was strong; in a low-price year, the same cash flow shrinks, the buyback slows, and the per-share compounding that the bull case relies on pauses. Production is also concentrated in the Utica and Marcellus, which face basin-specific takeaway and pricing constraints that can widen the discount to benchmark prices. Analyst targets near $239 imply substantial upside, but those same analysts have been adjusting in both directions, with UBS and BofA trimming targets while Mizuho and Jefferies raised theirs, reflecting genuine disagreement about where gas prices and Gulfport's normalized earnings settle. The risk is not solvency; it is that the apparent deep discount is measured against an earnings level the commodity cycle will not sustain.
Valuation
Gulfport's X-ray is unusually one-sided: essentially every method lands above the price, which is the signature of a commodity producer valued at a favorable point in the cycle. The relative method lands near $350, the Peter Lynch method near $365, the asset-based excess-return methods between $343 and $681, residual income near $531, and the EV/EBITDA method near $319, all well above the $161.14 price. A perpetual-growth DCF prints an implausible $2,257, which should be discounted as an artifact of extrapolating current cash flow, and the most conservative method, discounted future market cap, still lands near $234. The central blended read is about $404, and even the earnings-power value, the most conservative earnings-based anchor, sits just above the price near $152.
The inverted view is consistent with a value-supported name, but the caveat matters. The price is characterized as supported by all four families, with current operating margin near 49%. That 49% margin is the key number to interrogate: it is a commodity-price-driven figure, and the methods that mark the stock cheap are capitalizing it. The implied forward margin baked into the price is far lower, near 12%, which is the framework's way of saying the market is not extrapolating the current margin, it is already discounting a normalization.
The honest synthesis is that the stock is cheap on the methods precisely because the market doubts the durability of the current commodity environment. The bull case is that the LNG export buildout and emerging power demand structurally lift natural gas prices, in which case the methods are right and the stock is deeply undervalued with a fortress balance sheet and an aggressive buyback. The bear case is that gas prices are cyclical and the current 49% margin reverts, in which case the asset and earnings values fall with the price deck and the discount narrows. The value depends on a view of natural gas prices over the next several years, which is the one variable the company cannot control and the methods cannot resolve.
Catalysts
The dominant catalyst is the natural gas price, which drove revenue to more than double to $437.5 million and net income to $165.8 million; with Henry Hub around $3.19 to $3.29 per MMBtu, any move in gas prices flows straight through to cash flow and the equity value. The LNG export buildout is the structural demand catalyst, with U.S. feedgas demand running about 19% above the prior year, and emerging large-scale power and data-center demand is a forward driver the company is positioning for. Capital returns are a standing catalyst, with the repurchase program having retired roughly 43% of shares since 2021 and another $172.8 million bought back in the quarter; the pace of future buybacks scales with cash flow. Hedging provides a partial floor, with a portion of 2026 gas hedged at an average $3.74 per Mcf and a modest 2026 capital program of $400 million to $430 million. The leadership transition is a catalyst, with former Expand Energy chief Domenic Dell'Osso joining as incoming president and CEO, signaling continued operational and capital discipline. Operational efficiency gains, including an 8% improvement in Utica top-hole drilling days, lower well costs over time. Sentiment is positive, with a Moderate Buy consensus and an average target near $239, though recent target moves split between increases at Mizuho and Jefferies and trims at UBS and BofA, reflecting disagreement on where gas prices settle.
Sources: StockTitan Q1, Simply Wall St, IEA gas demand, MarketBeat
Peer Cohorts (Per Segment, With Filing Citations)
Oil and natural gas exploration and production (reported)
- RRC (RANGE RESOURCES CORPORATION)
- FY2025 10-K: …natural gas, NGLs and oil properties, securing and retaining personnel, conducting drilling and field operations and marketing production. Competitors in exploration, development, acquisitions and production include the major oil and gas companies as well as numerous independent oil and gas companies, individual…
- FY2025 10-K: …taxes). Revenues are based on a twelve-month unweighted average of the first day of the month pricing, without escalation. Future cash flows are reduced by estimated production costs, administrative costs, costs to develop and produce the proved reserves and abandonment costs, all based on current economic conditions…
- AR (ANTERO RESOURCES CORPORATION)
- FY2025 10-K: …competition for equipment, supplies and personnel during the spring and summer months, which could lead to shortages and increase costs or delay our operations. Competition The oil and natural gas industry is intensely competitive, and we compete with other companies in our industry that have greater resources than…
- FY2025 10-K: …Corporation's consolidated financial statements. 55 Table of Contents Exploration and Production Segment The following table sets forth selected operating data of the exploration and production segment: Year Ended Amount of December 31, Increase Percent …
- CTRA (COTERRA ENERGY INC.)
- FY2025 10-K: …14 percent of our total sales. During the year ended December 31, 2024, two customers accounted for approximately 21 percent and 19 percent of our total sales. If any one of our major customers were to stop purchasing our production, we believe there are other purchasers to whom we could sell our production. If…
- FY2025 10-K: …oil and natural gas facilities. New laws and regulations or revisions or reinterpretations of existing laws and regulations could further increase these costs, could increase our liability risks, and could result in increased restrictions on oil and gas exploration and production activities, which could have a…
- SM (SM ENERGY CO)
- FY2025 10-K: …the United States; • the increased demand for, price, and availability of alternative fuels or sources of energy; • technological advances in, and regulations affecting, energy consumption and conservation; • the ability of the members of OPEC+ to maintain effective oil price and production controls; • War and…
- FY2025 10-K: …of and transport fresh and produced water, own drilling rigs or production equipment, or generate electricity, all of which, individually or in the aggregate, could provide such companies with a competitive advantage. 19 We also compete with other oil and gas companies in securing drilling rigs and other equipment…
- MGY (Magnolia Oil & Gas Corp)
- FY2025 10-K: …of its oil, natural gas, and NGL production. The loss of one or more of such purchasers could, among other factors, limit Magnolia's access to suitable markets for the oil, natural gas, and NGLs it produces. Magnolia normally sells its production to a relatively small number of customers, as is customary in the oil…
- FY2025 10-K: …in the United States. Capitalized Costs The aggregate amounts of costs capitalized for oil and natural gas exploration and development activities and the related amounts of accumulated depreciation, depletion and amortization are shown below: (In thousands) December 31, 2025 December 31, 2024 Proved properties $…
- PR (PERMIAN RESOURCES CORPORATION)
- FY2025 10-K: …may have a competitive advantage when responding to factors that affect the supply and demand for oil and natural gas production, such as price fluctuations (including basis differentials), domestic and foreign political conditions, weather conditions, the proximity and capacity of natural gas pipelines and other…
- FY2025 10-K: …perhaps even be precluded from drilling wells. Conservation measures, technological advances and any negative shift in market perception toward the oil and natural gas industry could reduce demand for oil and natural gas. Fuel conservation measures, alternative fuel requirements, any increase in consumer demand for…
- APA (APA Corporation)
- FY2025 10-K: …gas, natural gas liquids (NGLs), and other products or services, including the prices received for natural gas purchased from third parties to sell and deliver to a U.S. LNG export facility; • the Company's commodity hedging arrangements; • the supply and demand for oil, natural gas, NGLs, and other products or…
- FY2025 10-K: …expense categories necessary to arrive at the segment profit or loss. (6) Includes Suriname operating expenses as the operating segment has not met the quantitative thresholds to be separately reported. F-50 APA CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued) 16. SUPPLEMENTAL OIL…
- CHRD (Chord Energy Corp)
- FY2025 10-K: …forms of energy that could result in increased operating costs, restrictions on drilling and reduced demand for the crude oil and natural gas that we produce. • Federal, state and local legislative and regulatory initiatives relating to hydraulic fracturing as well as governmental reviews of such activities could…
- FY2025 10-K: …and commodity prices. Any significant inaccuracies in these interpretations or assumptions could materially affect the estimated quantities and present value of reserves shown in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. See "Item 1. Business-Exploration and Production Operations" and "Item 8. Financial Statements and…
Methodology Note
- Priced-in inversion: the valuation is inverted on the current price to recover the operating-income growth, duration, and steady-state margin the price embeds (ROE for financials, FFO growth for REITs).
- Valuation x-ray: the valuation models, grouped into four families (asset, earnings, relative, growth). Each model is expressed as a price/FV ratio (distance from price), not a point fair-value estimate. The spread across families is the disagreement.
- Solvency: net cash/debt, net-debt-to-NOPAT, interest coverage, and share-count CAGR from EDGAR financials (net debt / FFO and fixed-charge coverage for REITs; regulatory-capital framing for financials).
- Peer cohorts: per-segment comparables with deep-linkable SEC filing citations.
Fundamentals sourced from SEC EDGAR filings. Current price from Databento. The priced-in inversion and valuation x-ray are computed by the boothcheck engine; narrative composed by AI from the structured data.