COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
AEP vs CPK
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. AEP scored 63.3, CPK scored 55.9 — AEP leads.
Compare another set
AEP
American Electric Power Company, Inc.
63.3
$120.94 · $65.8B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
7.4
AEP leads
CPK
Chesapeake Utilities Corporation
55.9
$134.13 · $3.2B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestAEP2.9x
- Fastest growthCPK+14.6%
- Strongest balance sheetCPK1.01
- Highest qualityCPK50 / 100
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)
AEP
stronger →← stronger
CPK
48
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
50
84
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
85
64
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
41
CPK is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
AEP
CPK
-$2.4bF
FCF
-$194mF
+10.9%B
Rev
+14.6%B+
1.61C+
D/E
1.01A-
2.9xB
P/S
3.3xC+
2.15C
PEG
2.48C
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.
Model signals
AEP
Why this score
- Short track record
CPK
Why this score
- Raising its dividend
The companies
AEPAmerican Electric Power Company, Inc.
Why now
Utilities - Regulated Electric · market cap $65.8b. 14% off the 52-week high of $140.58. Revenue growing +11%, comfortably above the S&P median. 20 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $144.20 (implying +19% upside).
Moat
Net margin 14% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 10% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. $65.8b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
Risk
Free cash flow is negative (-$2.4b) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk.
CPKChesapeake Utilities Corporation
Why now
Utilities - Regulated Gas · market cap $3.2b. 5% off the 52-week high of $140.83. Revenue growing +15%, comfortably above the S&P median. 5 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $146.90 (implying +10% upside).
Moat
Net margin 15% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent.
Risk
Free cash flow is negative (-$194m) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk. Reserve-replacement treadmill — every barrel or ounce extracted has to be replaced through exploration or acquisition; underspending on replacement reserves shows up in production declines 2-3 years out.
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 AEP and CPK diverge
On the headline score the gap is 7.4 points in favor of AEP. The widest single difference is Value, where AEP leads by 22.3 points.
- ValueAEP 63.7 · CPK 41.4AEP +22.3
- QualityAEP 47.6 · CPK 49.8level
- GrowthAEP 83.9 · CPK 84.5level
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.