Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. EXP scored 49.0, CRH scored 53.9 — CRH leads.
Compare another set
EXP
Eagle Materials Inc.
Building Materials · Quality-Growth
49
$164.70 · $5.1B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
4.9
CRH leads
CRH
CRH plc
Building Materials · Quality-Growth
53.9
$81.54 · $54.2B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestEXP13.2x
Fastest growthCRH+5.3%
Strongest balance sheetCRH0.78
Highest qualityEXP72 / 100
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)
EXP
stronger →← stronger
CRH
72
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
65
37
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
45
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
48
CRH is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
EXP
CRH
$171mC
FCF
$2.8bB
+1.7%C
Rev
+5.3%C+
1.21C
D/E
0.78C
13.2xB+
P/E
14.5xB+
2.09C
PEG
1.59C+
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
EXP
CRH
163% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
43% above
~28%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~14%/yr
-61%
1-yr DCF upside
-33%
-62%
5-yr DCF upside
-30%
-63%
10-yr DCF upside
-27%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
EXP
Why this score
Buying back stock
Durable high returns
CRH
Why this score
Raising its dividend
Cyclical growth
The companies
EXPEagle Materials Inc.
Building Materials · $164.70 · beta 1.33
Why now
Building Materials · market cap $5.1b. Down 33% from 52-week high of $245.53 — deep drawdown territory. 10 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $201.50 (implying +22% upside).
Moat
Net margin 17% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 27% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. Mining moat is reserve quality + extraction cost per unit — top-quartile cost producers generate cash through the commodity cycle while marginal producers burn it.
Risk
Down 33% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Production-cost sensitivity — top-quartile cost producers generate cash through the cycle while marginal producers burn it; watch the cost-per-unit trend, not just headline revenue.
CRHCRH plc
Building Materials · $81.54 · beta 1.19
Why now
Building Materials · market cap $54.2b. Down 38% from 52-week high of $131.55 — deep drawdown territory. 24 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $127.96 (implying +57% upside).
Moat
ROE 16% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. $54.2b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition. Mining moat is reserve quality + extraction cost per unit — top-quartile cost producers generate cash through the commodity cycle while marginal producers burn it.
Risk
Down 38% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. 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
CRH and EXP score effectively even on the Bull Rankings model (56.9 versus 56.9), so none holds a clear model edge — the call comes down to which trade-off you weight more: sector exposure (Building Materials) and valuation.
Our AI analyst is busy right now, so this verdict is drawn directly from the pillars, grades and DCF above.
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 EXP and CRH diverge
On the headline score the gap is 4.9 points in favor of CRH. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
GrowthEXP 36.8 · CRH 50.0CRH +13.2
QualityEXP 71.8 · CRH 64.7EXP +7.1
ValueEXP 44.5 · CRH 48.4CRH +3.9
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 CRH or EXP the better stock?
CRH scores higher: CRH 53.9, EXP 49.0 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 CRH and EXP differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where CRH leads by 13 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 CRH and EXP 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.