According to the CNBC.com special report, Powering the Planet, which is the “biggest” U.S. geothermal player?

The biggest US players are firms in which geothermal is only a portion of their business. This includes Chevron (CVX) b

CHEVRON CORP CVX 87.36  -2.06  -2.3%

NYSE

ut also Calpine (CPN) and Raser Technologies (RZ).

In other words, “all of the above.”

My latest column is up at RealMoney.

With oil dictating everything in this market, I can’t understand why ConocoPhillips (COP) is trading at 7 times next year’s earnings.

It’s not like the earnings estimates are falling. 90 days ago, analysts expected the company to earn $10.43 a share this year and $10.59 next year. Today, the estimates are $12.41 and $13.44, respectively. The consensus five-year growth rate is just 1%, which would mean a drop back to $7.65 a share within five years. I just don’t see that happening, so there should be potential upside surprise to the growth estimates as well.

It’s not the earnings quality, either — at least not as measured by the accrual ratio. That ratio shows that Conoco’s accounting-based earnings are within 3% of its cash-based earnings. At BP (BP - Annual Report) , the difference is 99%. Suncor Energy (SU - Annual Report) has a 50% accrual ratio. For Petrobras (PBR) , it’s a whopping 122%. I’ll take Conoco’s tight relationship between earnings and cash flow any day.

Speaking of cash flow, Conoco has just loads of it. Over the last 12 months, the company’s free cash flow (cash flow from operating activities less capital expenditures) was $12 billion. Cash from operations has been growing steadily, suggesting that the free cash flow may improve further. With Conoco’s $145 billion market capitalization, that amounts to a free cash flow yield of 8.3%. The 500-basis-point premium over Treasuries is a pretty attractive risk premium, even if the cash flow doesn’t grow. Among the integrated oil names, only Total Fina (TOT) has a higher free cash flow yield.

ExxonMobil (XOM - Annual Report) looks pretty good — its free-cash-flow yield is nearly as high as Conoco’s, and its earnings quality is equally robust. Its earnings estimates are rising as well, though not by as much as Conoco’s. Yet even though it’s got less earnings momentum, it is trading at a higher P/E of 9 times next year’s estimate.

I think Conoco’s growth rate will be more like 4% or 5% annually over the next five years, and that its price-to-book could expand to at least 2.0 times over the same time frame. By my calculations, that scenario would result in an average annual total return of 17% to 20% a year.

Disclosure: At time of publication, William Trent has no financial position in the companies mentioned in this article.

In “Is The Oil Rally Over?” (May 29) Joe Terranova told the Fast Money traders he’s playing oil by:

“I’m short Hess (HES) and I’m long Southwest Airlines (LUV), long the Canadian dollar and long one of the refiners,” he said.

In the models I use, Hess scores highly for earnings momentum and price momentum but poorly for free cash flow. Southwest Airlines gets high marks for earnings quality and free cash flow but scores low for return potential.

Disclosure: At the time of publication, William Trent has no financial position in the companies mentioned in this article.

In “Emerging Money: Up For ‘08″ how many of Tim Seymour’s trades were part of the Emerging Money Top 20 list?

I still like *Cemex (CX), *Posco (PCX) and *Gazprom (OGZPF) , says Seymour, but with volatility at 6 month lows, I’d also be looking at put protection.

Also watch Mobile Telesystems (MBT) which has earnings coming out Tuesday.

*Indicates company is part of “Fast Money’s” Emerging Money Top 20, an index made up of 20 firms poised to profit from explosive global growth.

By my count, there are three *’s indicating index membership.

In “$135: The Biggest Loser” the Fast Money team warned of companies hurt by oil prices. Which stock did they PAN?

It’s ironic in a way, but according to Tim Seymour, certain oil companies are going to have the hardest time coping with $135 crude. A company like PetroChina

PetroChina Co Ltd PTR 136.83  -1.55  -1.12%

NYSE

Quote  |  Chart  |  News  |  Profile

(PTR), that produces a refined product which it then has to subsidize to a local market, is going to suffer, he said.

By The Numbers blog: Which “winning energy stock” had the greatest 6-month percentage change (as of May 20)?

Here is a look at the companies in the S&P 500 Energy sector that have benefited the most from the rally in crude oil.

Although there were five coal stocks in the same article with higher returns than Hess over the six months, it looked like Hess was the best choice available.

All this talk on the energy crisis has led me to sell my own shares in the oil ETF (USO). However, I still think the long-term trend is up.

Disclosure: At time of publication, William Trent has no financial position in the companies mentioned in this article.

In the CNBC Stock Blog, “A Big Buy On Brazil,” what was Tom Del Zoppo’s advice?

Del Zoppo recommends that investors sell Citigroup (C - Annual Report) and buy Brazilian oil producer Petrobras (PBR).

Disclosure: At time of publication, William Trent has no financial position in the companies mentioned in this article.

With oil reaching new highs on the back of the oil inventory drawdown, I decided it was time to update my chart on the topic.

People who know more about energy investing than I have objected to my naive supply/demand analysis, so for now I make no attempts to draw conclusions. I’m still not convinced, but will keep my trap shut unless I can back it up with more substantial data.

I decided to take a look at what some of the largest companies by revenue are saying about their business.

All looks well at General Electric (GE - Annual Report).

The second quarter orders were a record, up 32%; we grew our backlog. We’ve got very strong global demand, up 21% in revenue. We continue our focus on margin expansion. Year-to-date we’re up 120 basis points; we’re up 70 basis points for the quarter. This is a big initiative inside the company, and one that we’re committed to….

Globalization and emerging markets, GE is very advantaged in these markets and these are just booming right now.

Infrastructure continues to be a real solid point for the company. Demographics as it pertains to both global growth and some of the action in GE Money is great. All of our focus on ecomagination, energy and investment/reinvestment is very solid.

If you look at what’s the same, we still see high liquidity in the marketplace. The U.S. consumer seems fine. Unemployment is at low levels, and we’re not seeing really any warning signs with the U.S. consumer….

On balance, we think we’re well-positioned in this environment. There’s no big surprises, and we feel like we’re in good shape as we look at the rest of the year.

(Excerpt from full GE conference call transcript)

Exxon Mobil (XOM - Annual Report) describes several reasons why investing in new projects can be risky, which helps explain why they haven’t invested as much as some would like (and why prices for oil are likely to remain high.)

Although increased volumes from the recent project start-ups in Russia, West Africa, and Qatar more than offset natural field decline, liquids production fell by 34,000 barrels per day, or 1% from the same quarter last year due to entitlement and OPEC quota effects in Africa….

ExxonMobile’s affiliate in Venezuela was not able to reach the agreement on the formation of a mixed enterprise and on June 27, 2007, the government took over our interest in the Serene rural project….

(Excerpt from full XOM conference call transcript)

And they didn’t even get to hurricanes, Iran, Iraq or terrorism. Makes you want to run out and drill an exploratory well, doesn’t it?

General Motors (GM) hopes to build a house of BRIC:

It was actually a very good quarter for other regions. Strong growth outside North America in the quarter, adjusted profitability of close to $700 million, $1.1 billion year-to-date. Revenue up 16%, share up 0.2%. I remind you our revenue does not include our business in China, as we carry it on the equity method so you would not see the growth in our business in China showing up in revenue. So this is really only on a consolidated basis.

Europe reported its best quarterly results since the second quarter of 1996, strong structural cost performance and favorable pricing. LAAM continues to leverage, it can only be termed explosive growth, reported the best quarter in ten years in both revenue and profitability. GMH reported a record second quarter adjusted net income with continued growth in China, India, and South Korea, as well as some improved performance in Australia….

Russia is a very fast-growing emerging market. 2.5 million units. It’s actually fast approaching one of the largest markets in Europe, actually, getting very close to France, Spain, Italy in terms of its size; and the U.K., as you can see. Our market share is up almost 4 points in Russia year-to-date.

Actually, we’re running behind in Brazil, we’re trailing in terms of market share in Brazil, but the driver of that is the market is up 50% in terms of its SAAR in the quarter. I would say the challenge in LAAM today is to keep up with the markets growth….

China, you can see the SAAR is up from 6.7 million to 8.3 million units. Our market share has not kept pace, so we’ve had some competitive pressures there, but nonetheless we’re still running pretty strong in China.

(Excerpt from full GM conference call transcript)

However, as if they needed any more challenges, they have subprime exposure that needs to be worked off.

ResCap lost over $900 million in the first quarter. We said that in the second quarter we expected that losses would narrow considerably and we expected better results. We did see that. Nonetheless, the $254 million is still a substantial challenge, it’s the largest business challenge for the GMAC management team in terms of restoring that business to where it needs to be. But it’s good to see the declining losses. We have sharply reduced our non-prime production, our non-prime exposure across warehouse lending, across some of our builder businesses. You saw run-off in the non-prime portfolio held for investment. We expect our run-off in the held for investment portfolio to be about $15 billion this year. So we’re basically reducing our exposure to non-prime and at the same time, we are seeing increased service fee income and lower structural costs.

So I would say the challenges continue here, but the first step in addressing the challenges is to stop deteriorating.

(Excerpt from full GM conference call transcript)

Citigroup (C - Annual Report) is also feeling the heat.

Net credit losses were up by $259 million, driven primarily by our global consumer business.

In consumer, key drivers are higher balances from organic portfolio growth and acquisitions; continued deterioration in the second mortgage portfolio; and the impact of the gray zone in Japan. In markets and banking, we continued to see a stable credit environment.

The third component is a $465 million net increase in the loan-loss reserve. There were two major drivers of this increase. First in the U.S. Cards business, the increase was driven by a change in the estimate of loan losses that are inherent in the portfolio. It is important to note that the underlying credit metrics have remained largely stable in our cards business. This reserve build reflects our focus on staying ahead of the visible credit trends, by considering as many factors as possible in establishing our reserves.

Second, in the international cards business, portfolio growth and seasoning and the impact of recent acquisitions resulted in higher reserve levels.

(Excerpt from full C conference call transcript)

Wal-Mart’s (WMT - Annual Report) customers are feeling the pinch.

Consumers today are pressed by a number of factors. Higher energy, higher gas prices and higher interest rates are all stretching their paychecks. Families with school-aged children are expected to spend more than $500 this year on back-to-school products. Our price campaign is designed to make a difference for families by saving them money where it counts most: on items like backpacks, pencils and socks. We’re encouraged by the response we’re seeing in back-to-school in August. 14 states have tax-free days during the start of this month. In addition, several states have delayed some school openings and we expect the trend we have seen with other seasons to continue. People are buying closer to the event.

As reported by other retailers, we’re experiencing similar trends in soft sales of home products driven by the slow down in housing. In addition, Wal-Mart’s softness in the home and apparel categories has been compounded by the difficulties we have had this past year and have shared with you. The result is that home and apparel remain soft through the second quarter. We’re starting to see some improvement in certain home categories this month and we are pleased so far with the sales results and customer response to the test of the New Home that we are piloting in several markets.

We continue to see pressure in all areas of apparel and continue to take pricing actions needed to sell through our inventory. We’re seeing some positive trends in sleepwear and men’s sports apparel. In the children’s areas, licensed apparel is picking up momentum and as I mentioned earlier on, we do expect our kid’s apparel categories to rebound this month.

(Excerpt from full WMT conference call transcript)

I guess it is not surprising that the top companies are seeing an outlook as mixed as that of the overall economy.

Disclosure: Author is long IShares MSCI Japan Index (EWJ) at time of publication.

For a book project we are working on we conducted a common size analysis of Exxon Mobil’s (XOM - Annual Report) and Total SA’s (TOT) financial statements. We figured it would be something worth passing along here.

In addition to comparing a single company’s performance over time, common size analysis can be a useful way to compare the performance of two or more companies with each other. However, this is not as easy as it may seem. For one thing, not all companies use the same reporting categories. Even if similar expense categories are used, one company may classify certain costs in a different category. For example, some companies include some or all of their depreciation expense within cost of sales, while others separate it out as a line item.

Exhibit 1 presents a side-by-side comparison of Total SA and and Exxon Mobil vertical common-size income statement data for 2006. Notice that Total reports higher “other operating expenses” than Exxon’s “production and manufacturing expenses” when measured as a percentage of sales. However, Total shows no category for “selling, general and administrative expense,” which it appears to include within that “other operating expenses” line along with production and manufacturing expense. To compare the performance, the investor must add Exxon’s production expenses (8.1%) to SG&A expenses (3.9%) to arrive at a category similar to Total’s “other operating expense.” On this basis, Exxon Mobil spent 12.0% on the category while Total spent 12.7%.

Exhibit 1: Cross Sectional Common Size Income Statement for Total SA and Exxon Mobil

Other issues include differences in accounting methods. We discussed the fact that beginning in 2006 Exxon Mobil must record the full estimated amount of its pension shortfall, whereas before it was only required to recognize a portion of it. Under International Accounting Standards, Total still reports just a portion of the expense, so the two are no longer comparable on that basis.

Companies can also employ different business models. We earlier compared the fixed cost structure of Landstar (LSTR - Annual Report) and Arkansas Best (ABFS). Because of their different business models, the cost structures may also differ. Landstar pays its drivers a percentage of the revenue from each load, whereas Arkansas Best pays drivers per mile driven. Arkansas Best may be able to reduce driver pay, while for Landstar the pay varies with revenue and is therefore something they would want to maximize in absolute dollar terms.

For these reasons, investors should have a solid understanding of any differences in accounting methods between companies being compared. Additionally, it is usually preferable to compare more broad based common-size data rather than line-by-line comparisons. Generally speaking, operating margin, pre-tax margin and net profit margin are more comparable between firms than, for example, gross margin or SG&A expenses.

In the case of Total SA and Exxon Mobil, Exxon appears to have higher operating margins – primarily due to lower purchases of crude inventory as a percentage of sales. Given its larger size, it is probably able to produce more of its own requirements. Other operating items appear relatively evenly matched, once some categorization adjustments are made.

Exxon also has lower sales-based taxes and more “other income.” While the taxes are a fair issue, it is probably not fair to judge management performance on the basis of non-operational items. However, regardless of the sources Exxon Mobil clearly appears to return a higher percentage of sales to its shareholders.

We can also compare both companies to industry data. For example, Yahoo! Finance reports key industry financial ratios, with the data provided by Hemscott Americas. Here is a selection of the industry data they provided for the Major Integrated Oil & Gas Industry recently. It is important not to take such third-party data at face value, however. A reader pointed out to us that Hemscott lists two separate market capitalizations for Total. Using the wrong one will result in the ratios being calculated improperly.

Exhibit 2: Industry Financial Data

The net profit margin given for Exxon Mobil and Total SA are similar to those we calculated, despite being made on the basis of the most recent quarter rather than the full year 2006. We can easily see that Exxon’s net margin was higher than the 10.3% industry average, while Total’s was lower.

We can also compare the debt to equity ratios of the firms and industry using this data. We find that Total SA has more debt than average, while Exxon has less. Finally, we can compare return on equity (see Chapter 6), which combines net income (an income statement item) with total equity (a balance sheet item.) Although both companies have higher returns on equity than the industry average, Exxon’s is the better of the two.

Overall it appears that Exxon Mobil is using its resources more effectively than Total.