U.S. markets closed

Evergy, Inc. (EVRG)

NYSE - NYSE Delayed Price. Currency in USD
Add to watchlist
53.80+0.22 (+0.41%)
At close: 4:00PM EST
Full screen
Trade prices are not sourced from all markets
Gain actionable insight from technical analysis on financial instruments, to help optimize your trading strategies
Chart Events
Bearishpattern detected
Price Crosses Moving Average

Price Crosses Moving Average

Previous Close53.58
Bid53.20 x 900
Ask54.40 x 800
Day's Range53.10 - 54.40
52 Week Range42.01 - 76.57
Avg. Volume2,196,081
Market Cap12.204B
Beta (5Y Monthly)0.35
PE Ratio (TTM)19.48
EPS (TTM)2.76
Earnings DateFeb 22, 2021 - Feb 26, 2021
Forward Dividend & Yield2.14 (3.99%)
Ex-Dividend DateNov 19, 2020
1y Target Est59.86
Fair Value is the appropriate price for the shares of a company, based on its earnings and growth rate also interpreted as when P/E Ratio = Growth Rate. Estimated return represents the projected annual return you might expect after purchasing shares in the company and holding them over the default time horizon of 5 years, based on the EPS growth rate that we have projected.
Fair Value
Near Fair Value
1% Est. Return
Research that delivers an independent perspective, consistent methodology and actionable insight
Related Research
View more
  • Evergy Chief Financial Officer Tony Somma to Leave the Company
    Business Wire

    Evergy Chief Financial Officer Tony Somma to Leave the Company

    Evergy, Inc. (NYSE: EVRG) today announced that after 27 years of service to the Company and its predecessor, Westar Energy, Tony Somma has informed the Board of Directors that he will leave the Company and retire. To support a smooth transition, Somma has agreed to continue in his current role as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer until his successor is appointed. The Company will conduct a search to identify its next Chief Financial Officer.

  • Today’s Dirty Utilities May Be Tomorrow’s ESG Winners

    Today’s Dirty Utilities May Be Tomorrow’s ESG Winners

    (Bloomberg Opinion) -- One way to think about the ESG thing is in religious terms: Proselytizers target heathens, not the saved.Environmental, social and governance investing today enjoys more hype than clarity. There is no agreement on exactly what counts as a compliant investment, and there is often a lack of clear economic signals tied to ESG-favored outcomes (elusive carbon pricing is a prime example). Does it make sense to invest in a company that’s already ticked a lot of ESG boxes or one that could yet do so? And how to be rewarded?U.S. utilities can thread this needle. Greenhouse-gas emissions from the power grid have fallen by more than a quarter since 2007, but much remains to be done. Moreover, utilities earn a regulated return on investment in new stuff, so there are quantifiable gains to be made on greening their asset base.Hugh Wynne and Eric Selmon, utilities analysts at Sector & Sovereign Research, have benchmarked this opportunity for 25 companies with a collective market cap of more than $600 billion. Their starting point is the carbon intensity of electricity generation in tonnes per megawatt-hours, both in 2019 and estimated for 2030, as implied by the companies’ decarbonization targets. In estimating that, they assume the utilities replace their highest-emitting plants (running on coal, oil or natural gas, in that order) with renewable generation at an average cost over the next decade of $1 per watt for solar power and $1.50 for wind.(1)One immediate observation is that the utilities that score better in terms of having low carbon intensity in 2019 also tend to be at the top of the table in 2030.You might think that makes them a shoo-in for ESG investors. But addressing climate change quickly means removing the highest-intensity sources of emissions first. Surely it makes at least as much sense to invest in companies that are big emitters now but have committed to fixing that — and need capital in order to do so. Bonus: As utilities, they have a chance of getting those investments into their regulated asset base.Rather than looking at absolute virtue signals, consider who is moving furthest and likely to spend big to get there.Utilities with nuclear plants — usually larger companies — or hydroelectric generation tend to score well on carbon-intensity already. Those that don’t, and which have more room for improvement, tend to be smaller utilities in the Midwest and West with significant coal-fired and other fossil-fuel generation capacity.As estimates built on objectives, these numbers aren’t set in stone. The added wrinkle is that regulators may not necessarily let utilities put investments in new capacity into the regulated asset base, but force them to contract power in competitive auctions. That would limit the overall opportunity versus the dollar amounts in the chart, although the environmental goal would still be met.Apart from ESG investors, the chart makes a useful screen for utilities themselves; ones looking to buy other utilities, anyway. Big investment requirements, particularly tied to a secular theme like renewables, make the best targets. PNM Resources Inc., the New Mexico utility that appears in that upper-right quadrant, is already the subject of a $7.6 billion agreed acquisition by Spanish renewables giant Iberdrola SA, due to close next fall. It is interesting to note Duke Energy Corp. and Evergy Inc. — both reportedly considered as targets at some point by NextEra Energy Inc. — screen low in terms of targeted cuts to emissions intensity. While that makes them potentially less interesting for an ESG portfolio, the potential to come in and execute a more ambitious decarbonization plan may make them interesting for NextEra.Regulators are another audience. By Wynne’s and Selmon’s calculations, the average cost of carbon abatement across the 25 utilities is just $19 per tonne, with a range of $13 to $37. Even if these costs do not reflect spending on associated wires and other infrastructure, they suggest further decarbonization is affordable across the states.The marginal cost rises as the highest-intensity sources are taken out; another reason to target these first. So as those costs rise, particularly as energy storage is incorporated to squeeze out gas-fired peaker plants, regulators should think more broadly. For example, with transportation now the biggest source of emissions in the U.S., it may make sense to steer utilities’ investment budgets toward lateral efforts like vehicle-charging infrastructure once their generation portfolios have decarbonized to a certain point. Either way, the ESG crowd should give their blessing.—With graphics assistance from Elaine He.(1) These are unsubsidized prices. The exact mix of solar and wind assets is determined either by published targets or the cheapest option depending on that utility's service territory. For the group, the analysis resulted in a split of 70% solar and 30% wind for the new generation capacity. The analysis does not include estimates for the spending required on new transmission or distribution infrastructure.This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Liam Denning is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering energy, mining and commodities. He previously was editor of the Wall Street Journal's Heard on the Street column and wrote for the Financial Times' Lex column. He was also an investment banker.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinionSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2021 Bloomberg L.P.

  • What You Need To Know About Evergy, Inc.'s (NYSE:EVRG) Investor Composition
    Simply Wall St.

    What You Need To Know About Evergy, Inc.'s (NYSE:EVRG) Investor Composition

    The big shareholder groups in Evergy, Inc. ( NYSE:EVRG ) have power over the company. Generally speaking, as a company...