COMPARE · Data as of August 12, 2026
ADM vs HSY
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ADM scored 52.2, HSY scored 67.6 — HSY leads.
Compare another set
ADM
Archer-Daniels-Midland Company
52.2
$79.73 · $38.4B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
15.4
HSY leads
HSY
The Hershey Company
67.6
$184.23 · $37.0B
fundamentals as of
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
ADM
stronger →← stronger
HSY
65
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
82
52
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
76
41
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
50
HSY is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
ADM
HSY
$1.7bC+
FCF
$2.2bB
+1.0%C
Rev
+7.7%B
0.39A-
D/E
1.30C+
21.8xB
P/E
24.9xC+
1.05B+
PEG
1.04B+
Winner per row is the stronger grade in our model; a tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
ADM
HSY
7% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
16% below
~5%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~6%/yr
-7%
1-yr DCF upside
+0%
-7%
5-yr DCF upside
+18%
-6%
10-yr DCF upside
+51%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
ADM
Why this score
- Short track record
HSY
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
ADMArcher-Daniels-Midland Company
Why now
Farm Products · market cap $38.4b. 10% off the 52-week high of $88.46. 10 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $78.70 (implying -1% upside).
Moat
Moat signals from the quantitative card are modest — profitability and capital efficiency are middle-of-pack. The thesis here depends on softer factors (switching costs, brand, distribution, regulatory protection) not captured by the quality-growth screen.
Risk
ROE 8% is below the long-run sustainable threshold of ~10% — capital efficiency would need to improve for the equity base to compound at the market rate.
HSYThe Hershey Company
Why now
Confectioners · market cap $37.0b. Down 23% from 52-week high of $239.48 — deep drawdown territory. 21 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $205.81 (implying +12% upside).
Moat
Net margin 12% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 33% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 150% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Mature compounder — the risk is paying up for quality at a moment when growth is decelerating. Watch for sequential revenue + margin trends; the inflection from "compounder" to "ex-compounder" is hard to spot until the multiple already started compressing.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where ADM and HSY diverge
On the headline score the gap is 15.4 points in favour of HSY. The widest single difference is Growth, where HSY leads by 23.5 points.
- GrowthADM 52.4 · HSY 75.9HSY +23.5
- QualityADM 65.4 · HSY 81.5HSY +16.1
- ValueADM 41.5 · HSY 49.8HSY +8.3
Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.