Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ALGT scored 32.1, HAFN scored 60.8 — HAFN leads.
Compare another set
ALGT
Allegiant Travel Company
Airlines · Quality-Growth
32.1
$76.43 · $2.1B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
28.7
HAFN leads
HAFN
Hafnia Limited
Marine Shipping · Quality-Growth
60.8
$10.72 · $5.7B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestHAFN8.3x
Fastest growthALGT+3.7%
Strongest balance sheetHAFN0.33
Highest qualityHAFN93 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueHAFN-19%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
ALGT
stronger →← stronger
HAFN
32
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
93
44
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
27
24
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
89
HAFN is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
ALGT
HAFN
$117mC
FCF
$584mC+
+3.7%C+
Rev
-20.5%F
1.60C
D/E
0.33A-
65.3xC
P/E
8.3xA
0.85B+
PEG
—
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
ALGT
HAFN
19% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
19% below
~18%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-6%/yr
-32%
1-yr DCF upside
+38%
-16%
5-yr DCF upside
+23%
+13%
10-yr DCF upside
+5%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
ALGT
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
HAFN
Why this score
Raising its dividend
Short track record
The companies
ALGTAllegiant Travel Company
Airlines · $76.43 · beta 1.54
Why now
Airlines · market cap $2.1b. Down 38% from 52-week high of $123.63 — deep drawdown territory. PEG 0.85 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 14 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $117.43 (implying +54% 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
Trailing P/E 65.3x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Down 38% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 1.54 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return.
HAFNHafnia Limited
Marine Shipping · $10.72 · beta -0.19
Why now
Marine Shipping · market cap $5.7b. Trading near 52-week high of $10.89 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. Revenue -20% — in contraction; any catalyst that reverses this triggers re-rating.
Moat
Net margin 25% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 27% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which.
Risk
Revenue contracting -20% — the operational turn is not yet visible in the top line. Trading within 2% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction.
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 ALGT and HAFN diverge
On the headline score the gap is 28.7 points in favor of HAFN. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
ValueALGT 23.5 · HAFN 89.5HAFN +66.0
QualityALGT 32.0 · HAFN 92.7HAFN +60.7
GrowthALGT 43.7 · HAFN 27.1ALGT +16.6
Pillars run 0–100. Value is judged against each company's own sector, so a Value 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.
Common questions
Is HAFN or ALGT the better stock?
HAFN scores higher: HAFN 60.8, ALGT 32.1 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
Where do HAFN and ALGT differ most?
The widest gap is value, where HAFN leads by 66 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. Neither name sweeps: they trade the lead across the three pillars, so the comparison is a trade-off rather than one being better on every measure.
How are HAFN and ALGT scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.