Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. CXW scored 54.1, ALLE scored 74.1 — ALLE leads.
Compare another set
CXW
CoreCivic, Inc.
Security & Protection Services · Quality-Growth
54.1
$32.93 · $3.3B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
20.0
ALLE leads
ALLE
Allegion plc
Security & Protection Services · Quality-Growth
74.1
$150.48 · $12.8B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestALLE19.7x
Fastest growthCXW+12.7%
Strongest balance sheetCXW0.95
Highest qualityALLE83 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueALLE-2%
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)
CXW
stronger →← stronger
ALLE
54
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
83
76
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
73
39
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
68
ALLE is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
CXW
ALLE
$57mC-
FCF
$671mC+
+12.7%B+
Rev
+10.6%B
0.95C+
D/E
1.05C+
26.3xB
P/E
19.7xB+
1.06B+
PEG
1.90C+
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
CXW
ALLE
107% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
2% below
~26%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~6%/yr
-57%
1-yr DCF upside
-5%
-52%
5-yr DCF upside
+2%
-42%
10-yr DCF upside
+13%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Security & Protection Services · market cap $3.3b. 10% off the 52-week high of $36.55. Revenue growing +13%, comfortably above the S&P median. 5 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $41.80 (implying +27% 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
Mature compounder — the risk is paying up for quality at a moment when growth is decelerating. Watch for sequential revenue + margin trends; the inflection from "compounder" to "ex-compounder" is hard to spot until the multiple already started compressing.
Security & Protection Services · market cap $12.8b. 18% off the 52-week high of $183.11. Revenue growing +11%, comfortably above the S&P median. 11 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $178.00 (implying +18% 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. ROE 31% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 102% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Mature compounder — the risk is paying up for quality at a moment when growth is decelerating. Watch for sequential revenue + margin trends; the inflection from "compounder" to "ex-compounder" is hard to spot until the multiple already started compressing.
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 CXW and ALLE diverge
On the headline score the gap is 20.0 points in favor of ALLE. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
QualityCXW 53.6 · ALLE 82.9ALLE +29.3
ValueCXW 38.8 · ALLE 67.5ALLE +28.7
GrowthCXW 75.8 · ALLE 72.6CXW +3.2
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 ALLE or CXW the better stock?
ALLE scores higher: ALLE 74.1, CXW 54.1 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 ALLE and CXW differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where ALLE leads by 29 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. Neither name sweeps: they trade the lead across the three pillars, so the comparison is a trade-off rather than one being better on every measure.
How are ALLE and CXW 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.