Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. DAR scored 63.6, POST scored 50.3 — DAR leads.
Compare another set
DAR
Darling Ingredients Inc.
Packaged Foods · Quality-Growth
63.6
$60.26 · $9.5B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
13.3
DAR leads
POST
Post Holdings, Inc.
Packaged Foods · Quality-Growth
50.3
$74.82 · $3.3B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestPOST13.6x
Fastest growthDAR+7.4%
Strongest balance sheetDAR0.79
Highest qualityDAR63 / 100
Largest discount to fair valuePOST-62%
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
POST
63
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
52
60
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
52
68
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
47
DAR is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
DAR
POST
$881mC+
FCF
$553mC+
+7.4%B
Rev
+6.2%C+
0.79B
D/E
2.47C
16.2xB+
P/E
13.6xA-
4.31D
PEG
—
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
POST
30% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
62% below
~-3%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-18%/yr
+37%
1-yr DCF upside
+155%
+44%
5-yr DCF upside
+163%
+53%
10-yr DCF upside
+175%
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
DAR
No notable signals flagged.
POST
Why this score
Buying back stock
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.
POSTPost Holdings, Inc.
Packaged Foods · $74.82 · beta 0.32
Why now
Packaged Foods · market cap $3.3b. Down 36% from 52-week high of $117.28 — deep drawdown territory. 6 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $104.00 (implying +39% upside).
Moat
FCF converts 189% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
D/E 2.47 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Down 36% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Net margin 3.5% 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 POST diverge
On the headline score the gap is 13.3 points in favor of DAR. The widest single difference is Value, where DAR leads by 20.9 points.
ValueDAR 67.9 · POST 47.0DAR +20.9
QualityDAR 63.0 · POST 52.5DAR +10.5
GrowthDAR 60.2 · POST 51.8DAR +8.4
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 POST the better stock?
DAR scores higher: DAR 63.6, POST 50.3 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 POST differ most?
The widest gap is value, where DAR leads by 21 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. DAR leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are DAR and POST 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.