Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. BBUC scored 31.3, PAM scored 58.2 — PAM leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. PAM'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
31.3
$26.67 · $5.5B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
26.9
PAM leads
PAM
Pampa Energía S.A.
Conglomerates · Quality-Growth
58.2
$80.34 · $4.3B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestBBUC0.2x
Fastest growthPAM+6.5%
Strongest balance sheetPAM0.65
Highest qualityPAM49 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueBBUC-49%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/S 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)
BBUC
stronger →← stronger
PAM
31
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
49
14
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
70
70
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
58
PAM is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
BBUC
PAM
$1.2bC+
FCF
-$455mF
-32.4%F
Rev
+6.5%C+
2.96D
D/E
0.65B
0.2xA
P/S
1.8xB+
—
PEG
0.69A-
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
BBUC
PAM
49% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
—
~-18%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
—
+121%
1-yr DCF upside
—
+98%
5-yr DCF upside
—
+71%
10-yr DCF upside
—
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
BBUC
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
PAM
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
BBUCBrookfield Business Corporation
Conglomerates · $26.67 · beta 1.39
Why now
Conglomerates · market cap $5.5b. Down 30% 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 rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $39.00 (implying +46% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income.
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. Down 30% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
PAMPampa Energía S.A.
Conglomerates · $80.34 · beta -0.24
Why now
Conglomerates · market cap $4.3b. 15% off the 52-week high of $94.50. PEG 0.69 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 11 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $121.09 (implying +51% upside).
Moat
Net margin 24% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 15% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately.
Risk
Free cash flow is negative (-$455m) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk.
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 BBUC and PAM diverge
On the headline score the gap is 26.9 points in favor of PAM. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
GrowthBBUC 14.1 · PAM 69.8PAM +55.7
QualityBBUC 31.1 · PAM 48.9PAM +17.8
ValueBBUC 69.9 · PAM 57.8BBUC +12.1
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 PAM or BBUC the better stock?
PAM scores higher: PAM 58.2, BBUC 31.3 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 PAM and BBUC differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where PAM leads by 56 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 PAM and BBUC 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.