Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. BG scored 51.0, DAR scored 63.6 — DAR leads.
Compare another set
BG
Bunge Global SA
Farm Products · Quality-Growth
51
$102.73 · $19.7B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
12.6
DAR leads
DAR
Darling Ingredients Inc.
Packaged Foods · Quality-Growth
63.6
$60.26 · $9.5B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Fastest growthBG+32.4%
Strongest balance sheetDAR0.79
Highest qualityDAR63 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueDAR-30%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
BG
stronger →← stronger
DAR
38
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
63
81
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
60
44
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
68
DAR is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
BG
DAR
-$711mF
FCF
$881mC+
+32.4%A
Rev
+7.4%B
0.98B
D/E
0.79B
0.2xA
P/S
—
1.37B
PEG
4.31D
—
P/E
16.8xB+
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
BG
DAR
—
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
30% below
—
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-3%/yr
—
1-yr DCF upside
+37%
—
5-yr DCF upside
+44%
—
10-yr DCF upside
+53%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
BG
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
DAR
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
BGBunge Global SA
Farm Products · $102.73 · beta 0.72
Why now
Farm Products · market cap $19.7b. Down 24% from 52-week high of $134.87 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +32% — in hypergrowth territory. 9 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $141.78 (implying +38% upside).
Moat
Higher-variance name — the moat signals on the quantitative card are modest, so the durability case rests on execution (turning current growth into durable earnings power) or an un-monetized asset (IP / network effects / first-mover position) rather than an entrenched competitive position.
Risk
Free cash flow is negative (-$711m) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk. Net margin 1.1% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first. ROE 7% 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.
DARDarling Ingredients Inc.
Packaged Foods · $60.26 · beta 1.05
Why now
Packaged Foods · market cap $9.5b. 14% off the 52-week high of $69.98. 12 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $81.58 (implying +35% upside).
Moat
ROE 12% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 147% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
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 BG and DAR diverge
On the headline score the gap is 12.6 points in favor of DAR. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
QualityBG 37.6 · DAR 63.0DAR +25.4
ValueBG 43.7 · DAR 67.9DAR +24.2
GrowthBG 80.9 · DAR 60.2BG +20.7
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 DAR or BG the better stock?
DAR scores higher: DAR 63.6, BG 51.0 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 DAR and BG differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where DAR leads by 25 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 DAR and BG 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.