COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
CEPU vs FE
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. CEPU scored 50.8, FE scored 62.1 — FE leads.
Compare another set
CEPU
Central Puerto S.A.
50.8
$12.98 · $1.9B
Score gap
11.3
FE leads
FE
FirstEnergy Corp.
62.1
$45.96 · $26.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- Fastest growthFE+11.3%
- Strongest balance sheetCEPU0.33
- Highest qualityCEPU58 / 100
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
CEPU
stronger →← stronger
FE
58
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
55
44
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
82
94
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
53
CEPU is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
CEPU
FE
$56mC-
FCF
-$1.7bF
+8.1%B
Rev
+11.3%B
0.33A
D/E
2.01C
6.0xA
P/E
—
—
PEG
1.68C+
—
P/S
1.7xA-
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
CEPU
FE
186% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
—
~25%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
—
-61%
1-yr DCF upside
—
-65%
5-yr DCF upside
—
-70%
10-yr DCF upside
—
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
CEPU
Why this score
- Foreign reporter (ARS)
FE
Why this score
- Durable high returns
The companies
CEPUCentral Puerto S.A.
Why now
Utilities - Regulated Electric · market cap $1.9b. Down 30% from 52-week high of $18.50 — deep drawdown territory. 5 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $24.01 (implying +85% 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
ROE 3% 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.
FEFirstEnergy Corp.
Why now
Utilities - Regulated Electric · market cap $26.6b. 12% off the 52-week high of $52.34. Revenue growing +11%, comfortably above the S&P median. 12 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $53.25 (implying +16% 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
D/E 2.01 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Free cash flow is negative (-$1.7b) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk. Trailing P/E 97.8x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating.
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 CEPU and FE diverge
On the headline score the gap is 11.3 points in favor of FE. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- ValueCEPU 93.7 · FE 53.1CEPU +40.6
- GrowthCEPU 44.1 · FE 81.6FE +37.5
- QualityCEPU 57.7 · FE 55.3level
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.