COMPARE · Data as of August 12, 2026
ADM vs POST
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ADM scored 52.2, POST scored 67.1 — POST leads.
Compare another set
ADM
Archer-Daniels-Midland Company
52.2
$79.73 · $38.4B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
14.9
POST leads
POST
Post Holdings, Inc.
67.1
$80.58 · $3.7B
fundamentals as of
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
ADM
stronger →← stronger
POST
65
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
52
52
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
77
41
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
75
POST is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
ADM
POST
$1.7bC+
FCF
$553mC+
+1.0%C
Rev
+6.2%C+
0.39A-
D/E
2.47D
21.8xB
P/E
14.7xA-
1.05B+
PEG
1.17B+
Winner per row is the stronger grade in our model; a tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
ADM
POST
7% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
46% below
~5%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-16%/yr
-7%
1-yr DCF upside
+106%
-7%
5-yr DCF upside
+85%
-6%
10-yr DCF upside
+60%
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
POST
Why this score
- Buying back stock
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.
POSTPost Holdings, Inc.
Why now
Packaged Foods · market cap $3.7b. Down 31% from 52-week high of $117.28 — deep drawdown territory. 6 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $105.17 (implying +31% upside).
Moat
FCF converts 189% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
D/E 2.47 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Down 31% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Net margin 3.5% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
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 POST diverge
On the headline score the gap is 14.9 points in favour of POST. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- ValueADM 41.5 · POST 75.2POST +33.7
- GrowthADM 52.4 · POST 76.5POST +24.1
- QualityADM 65.4 · POST 52.5ADM +12.9
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.