COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026

BBUC vs MMM

Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. BBUC scored 36.5, MMM scored 49.6 — MMM leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. MMM's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but BBUC's are as of December 2025 — a 6-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
BBUC
Brookfield Business Corporation
Conglomerates · Quality-Growth
36.5
$28.65 · $5.9B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
13.1
MMM leads
MMM
3M Company
Conglomerates · Quality-Growth
49.6
$178.96 · $92.3B
fundamentals as of
  • Fastest growthMMM+2.3%
  • Strongest balance sheetBBUC2.96
  • Highest qualityMMM71 / 100
  • Largest discount to fair valueBBUC-72%
THE BULL RANKINGS SCORECARD36.5/ 100 · BULL SCOREPEER MEDIANQUALITY35.3GROWTH14.1VALUE97.9
THE BULL RANKINGS SCORECARD49.6/ 100 · BULL SCOREPEER MEDIANQUALITY70.9GROWTH50.5VALUE34.0
BBUCMMMQuality35.370.9Growth14.150.5Value97.934.0
FCFBBUC$1.2bMMM$4.0b
RevBBUC-32.4%MMM+2.3%
D/EBBUC2.96MMM4.38
BBUC
stronger →← stronger
MMM
35
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
71
14
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
51
98
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
34
MMM is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
BBUC
MMM
$1.2bC+
FCF
$4.0bB
-32.4%F
Rev
+2.3%C
2.96D
D/E
4.38D
0.2xA
P/S
PEG
1.82C+
P/E
31.7xB
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.
BBUC
MMM
72% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
45% above
~-17%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~16%/yr
+175%
1-yr DCF upside
-37%
+259%
5-yr DCF upside
-31%
+423%
10-yr DCF upside
-23%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
BBUC
Why this score
  • Diluting shareholders
  • Short track record
MMM
Why this score
  • Buying back stock
  • Raising its dividend
BBUCBrookfield Business Corporation
Conglomerates · $28.65 · beta 1.37
Why now
Conglomerates · market cap $5.9b. Down 25% from 52-week high of $38.25 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue -32% — in contraction; any catalyst that reverses this triggers re-rating. 8 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $38.81 (implying +35% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income — non-cash charges (depreciation, intangible amortization) are holding down GAAP earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
D/E 2.96 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Revenue contracting -32% — the operational turn is not yet visible in the top line. Net margin 1.4% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
MMM3M Company
Conglomerates · $178.96 · beta 1.08
Why now
Conglomerates · market cap $92.3b. 3% off the 52-week high of $184.90. 17 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $185.57 (implying +4% upside).
Moat
FCF converts 133% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined. $92.3b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
Risk
D/E 4.38 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Trailing P/E 32x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
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 BBUC and MMM diverge

On the headline score the gap is 13.1 points in favor of MMM. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.

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.