COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
CRC vs SM
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. CRC scored 54.1, SM scored 61.4 — SM leads.
Compare another set
CRC
California Resources Corporation
54.1
$53.24 · $4.7B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
7.3
SM leads
SM
SM Energy Company
61.4
$37.20 · $8.8B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- Fastest growthSM+75.4%
- Strongest balance sheetCRC0.40
- Highest qualitySM73 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueCRC-42%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
CRC
stronger →← stronger
SM
40
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
73
46
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
86
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
64
SM is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
CRC
SM
$385mC
FCF
$743mC+
+4.5%C+
Rev
+75.4%A
0.40B+
D/E
0.95C+
1.4xB+
P/S
—
0.32A
PEG
0.65A-
—
P/E
6.6xA
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
CRC
SM
42% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
39% below
~-3%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-7%/yr
+46%
1-yr DCF upside
+59%
+72%
5-yr DCF upside
+63%
+119%
10-yr DCF upside
+69%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
CRC
Why this score
- Diluting shareholders
SM
Why this score
- Raising its dividend
- Cyclical growth
The companies
CRCCalifornia Resources Corporation
Why now
Oil & Gas E&P · market cap $4.7b. Down 26% from 52-week high of $71.98 — deep drawdown territory. PEG 0.32 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 11 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $77.55 (implying +46% upside).
Moat
Turnaround / out-of-favor name — GAAP-unprofitable for now, so the durability case is forward-looking: it rests on a recovery (margin normalization, a cyclical upturn or restructuring) or an un-monetized asset (IP / network effects / first-mover position) rather than on current reported results.
Risk
Currently unprofitable (margin -3.6%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk. ROE -4% 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. Jurisdictional + permitting risk — mining and extraction operations concentrate exposure to political stability, royalty regimes, and environmental review timelines that can stall production for years.
SMSM Energy Company
Why now
Oil & Gas E&P · market cap $8.8b. Trading near 52-week high of $38.25 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. Revenue growing +75% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.65 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 15 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $40.60 (implying +9% upside).
Moat
Net margin 18% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 13% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere.
Risk
Trading within 3% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. Commodity exposure — earnings power tracks the price of the underlying commodity, not management execution. A 15-20% move in the commodity reprices the equity well before fundamentals catch up.
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 CRC and SM diverge
On the headline score the gap is 7.3 points in favor of SM. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- QualityCRC 39.8 · SM 72.8SM +33.0
- ValueCRC 86.1 · SM 63.6CRC +22.5
- GrowthCRC 46.3 · SM 50.0SM +3.7
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.