COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
CEPU vs MWH
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. CEPU scored 50.8, MWH scored 72.0 — MWH leads.
Compare another set
CEPU
Central Puerto S.A.
50.8
$12.98 · $1.9B
Score gap
21.2
MWH leads
MWH
SOLV Energy, Inc.
72
$28.34 · $5.7B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestCEPU6.0x
- Fastest growthMWH+34.8%
- Strongest balance sheetMWH0.10
- Highest qualityMWH75 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueMWH-34%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E 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)
CEPU
stronger →← stronger
MWH
58
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
75
44
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
95
94
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
87
MWH is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
CEPU
MWH
$56mC-
FCF
$368mC
+8.1%B
Rev
+34.8%A
0.33A
D/E
0.10A
6.0xA
P/E
48.0xD
—
PEG
1.17B+
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
MWH
186% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
34% below
~25%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~4%/yr
-61%
1-yr DCF upside
+15%
-65%
5-yr DCF upside
+51%
-70%
10-yr DCF upside
+125%
These two disagree on this pair: the Value pillar ranks cheapness against sector peers, while price-vs-fair-value is an absolute read. A name can be the better value in its sector and still the dearer one on cash flows.
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)
MWH
Why this score
- Short track record
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.
MWHSOLV Energy, Inc.
Why now
Utilities - Renewable · market cap $5.7b. Down 41% from 52-week high of $48.40 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +35% — in hypergrowth territory. 11 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $45.18 (implying +59% 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
Down 41% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Trailing P/E 48x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. Net margin 3.8% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
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 MWH diverge
On the headline score the gap is 21.2 points in favor of MWH. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- GrowthCEPU 44.1 · MWH 95.2MWH +51.1
- QualityCEPU 57.7 · MWH 74.9MWH +17.2
- ValueCEPU 93.7 · MWH 86.5CEPU +7.2
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.