Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. CCJ scored 29.9, UEC scored 12.3 — CCJ leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. UEC's fundamentals are as of July 2026, but CCJ's are as of December 2025 — a 7-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
CCJ
Cameco Corporation
Uranium · Quality-Growth
29.9
$88.06 · $38.4B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
17.6
CCJ leads
UEC
Uranium Energy Corp.
Uranium · Quality-Growth
12.3
$9.19 · $4.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Strongest balance sheetUEC0.00
Highest qualityCCJ62 / 100
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
CCJ
stronger →← stronger
UEC
62
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
24
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
10
10
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
8
CCJ is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
CCJ
UEC
$390mC
FCF
-$107mF
+11.0%B
Rev
—
0.17A-
D/E
0.00A
149.3xD
P/E
—
1.92C+
PEG
1.37B
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
CCJ
UEC
488% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
—
~58%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
—
-85%
1-yr DCF upside
—
-83%
5-yr DCF upside
—
-80%
10-yr DCF upside
—
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
CCJ
Why this score
Cyclical growth
Foreign reporter (CAD)
UEC
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
The companies
CCJCameco Corporation
Uranium · $88.06 · beta 1.14
Why now
Uranium · market cap $38.4b. Down 35% from 52-week high of $135.24 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +11%, comfortably above the S&P median. 11 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $126.78 (implying +44% upside).
Moat
Net margin 17% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. FCF converts 157% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Trailing P/E 149.3x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Down 35% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. P/S 15.7x embeds aggressive forward growth — disappointing top-line guidance would compress the multiple hard.
UECUranium Energy Corp.
Uranium · $9.19 · beta 1.39
Why now
Uranium · market cap $4.6b. Down 55% from 52-week high of $20.34 — deep drawdown territory. 11 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $16.12 (implying +75% 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 (-$107m) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk. Down 55% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. ROE -10% 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.
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 CCJ and UEC diverge
On the headline score the gap is 17.6 points in favor of CCJ. The widest single difference is Growth, where CCJ leads by 40.0 points.
GrowthCCJ 50.0 · UEC 10.0CCJ +40.0
QualityCCJ 62.0 · UEC 23.9CCJ +38.1
ValueCCJ 10.1 · UEC 7.8level
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 CCJ or UEC the better stock?
CCJ scores higher: CCJ 29.9, UEC 12.3 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 CCJ and UEC differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where CCJ leads by 40 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. CCJ also leads quality, while value is effectively level between them.
How are CCJ and UEC 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.