Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. DAR scored 63.6, LW scored 42.4 — DAR leads.
Compare another set
DAR
Darling Ingredients Inc.
Packaged Foods · Quality-Growth
63.6
$60.26 · $9.5B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
21.2
DAR leads
LW
Lamb Weston Holdings, Inc.
Packaged Foods · Quality-Growth
42.4
$47.87 · $6.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestDAR16.2x
Fastest growthDAR+7.4%
Strongest balance sheetDAR0.79
Highest qualityLW65 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueDAR-30%
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)
DAR
stronger →← stronger
LW
63
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
65
60
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
47
68
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
25
DAR is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
DAR
LW
$881mC+
FCF
$540mC+
+7.4%B
Rev
+2.5%C
0.79B
D/E
2.19C
16.2xB+
P/E
26.2xC+
4.31D
PEG
0.81B+
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
DAR
LW
30% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
28% below
~-3%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-1%/yr
+37%
1-yr DCF upside
+28%
+44%
5-yr DCF upside
+39%
+53%
10-yr DCF upside
+54%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
The companies
DARDarling Ingredients Inc.
Packaged Foods · $60.26 · beta 1.05
Why now
Packaged Foods · market cap $9.5b. 14% off the 52-week high of $69.98. 12 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $81.58 (implying +35% upside).
Moat
ROE 12% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 147% 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.
LWLamb Weston Holdings, Inc.
Packaged Foods · $47.87 · beta 0.47
Why now
Packaged Foods · market cap $6.6b. Down 29% from 52-week high of $67.07 — deep drawdown territory. PEG 0.81 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 12 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $56.00 (implying +17% upside).
Moat
ROE 14% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income, mostly because of depreciation and amortization ($397m) — non-cash charges that hold down reported earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
D/E 2.19 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. 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 DAR and LW diverge
On the headline score the gap is 21.2 points in favor of DAR. The widest single difference is Value, where DAR leads by 43.2 points.
ValueDAR 67.9 · LW 24.7DAR +43.2
GrowthDAR 60.2 · LW 47.4DAR +12.8
QualityDAR 63.0 · LW 65.2level
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 DAR or LW the better stock?
DAR scores higher: DAR 63.6, LW 42.4 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 DAR and LW differ most?
The widest gap is value, where DAR leads by 43 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. DAR also leads growth, while quality is effectively level between them.
How are DAR and LW 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.