Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. EMA scored 57.1, MWH scored 72.0 — MWH leads.
Compare another set
EMA
Emera Incorporated
Utilities - Regulated Electric · Quality-Growth
57.1
$45.66 · $14.0B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
14.9
MWH leads
MWH
SOLV Energy, Inc.
Utilities - Renewable · Quality-Growth
72
$26.21 · $5.3B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Fastest growthMWH+34.8%
Strongest balance sheetMWH0.10
Highest qualityMWH74 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueMWH-23%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
EMA
stronger →← stronger
MWH
45
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
74
68
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
95
70
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
75
MWH is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
EMA
MWH
-$816mF
FCF
$295mC
+21.9%A-
Rev
+34.8%A
1.54B
D/E
0.10A
2.2xB
P/S
—
2.81C
PEG
1.65C+
—
P/E
55.8xD
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
EMA
MWH
—
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
23% below
—
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~9%/yr
—
1-yr DCF upside
-1%
—
5-yr DCF upside
+29%
—
10-yr DCF upside
+90%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
EMA
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
Foreign reporter (CAD)
MWH
Why this score
Short track record
The companies
EMAEmera Incorporated
Utilities - Regulated Electric · $45.66 · beta 0.42
Why now
Utilities - Regulated Electric · market cap $14.0b. 18% off the 52-week high of $55.49. Revenue growing +22%, comfortably above the S&P median.
Moat
Higher-variance name — the moat signals on the quantitative card are modest, so the durability case rests on execution (turning current growth into durable earnings power) or an un-monetized asset (IP / network effects / first-mover position) rather than an entrenched competitive position.
Risk
Free cash flow is negative (-$816m) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk. Dividend payout 92% of earnings on a 4.6% yield — distribution coverage is thin; one earnings stumble could force a dividend cut. ROE 8% 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.
MWHSOLV Energy, Inc.
Utilities - Renewable · $26.21
Why now
Utilities - Renewable · market cap $5.3b. Down 46% from 52-week high of $48.40 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +35% — in hypergrowth territory. 11 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $43.73 (implying +67% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income, mostly because of depreciation and amortization ($96m) — non-cash charges that hold down reported earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
Trailing P/E 55.8x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Down 46% 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 3.8% 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 EMA and MWH diverge
On the headline score the gap is 14.9 points in favor of MWH. The widest single difference is Quality, where MWH leads by 28.7 points.
QualityEMA 45.5 · MWH 74.2MWH +28.7
GrowthEMA 68.2 · MWH 95.4MWH +27.2
ValueEMA 70.0 · MWH 74.9MWH +4.9
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 MWH or EMA the better stock?
MWH scores higher: MWH 72.0, EMA 57.1 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 MWH and EMA differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where MWH leads by 29 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. MWH leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are MWH and EMA 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.