Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. F scored 26.9, ALV scored 63.2 — ALV leads.
Compare another set
F
Ford Motor Company
Auto Manufacturers · Quality-Growth
26.9
$12.17 · $48.5B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
36.3
ALV leads
ALV
Autoliv, Inc.
Auto Parts · Quality-Growth
63.2
$109.76 · $8.0B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Fastest growthALV+5.9%
Strongest balance sheetALV0.88
Highest qualityALV81 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueF-28%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
F
stronger →← stronger
ALV
27
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
81
25
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
29
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
63
ALV is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
F
ALV
$7.3bB+
FCF
$757mC+
+1.2%C
Rev
+5.9%C+
4.57D
D/E
0.88B
0.3xA
P/S
—
8.48D
PEG
0.85B+
—
P/E
12.9xA-
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
F
ALV
28% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
14% below
~-5%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~2%/yr
+38%
1-yr DCF upside
+10%
+38%
5-yr DCF upside
+16%
+38%
10-yr DCF upside
+24%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
F
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
Cut its dividend
ALV
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
Durable high returns
Cyclical growth
The companies
FFord Motor Company
Auto Manufacturers · $12.17 · beta 1.94
Why now
Auto Manufacturers · market cap $48.5b. Down 32% from 52-week high of $17.78 — deep drawdown territory. 18 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $15.75 (implying +29% upside).
Moat
Turnaround / out-of-favor name — GAAP-unprofitable for now, so the durability case is forward-looking: it rests on a recovery (margin normalization, a cyclical upturn or restructuring) or an un-monetized asset (IP / network effects / first-mover position) rather than on current reported results.
Risk
D/E 4.57 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Currently unprofitable (margin -3.9%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk. Down 32% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
ALVAutoliv, Inc.
Auto Parts · $109.76 · beta 1.40
Why now
Auto Parts · market cap $8.0b. 17% off the 52-week high of $132.17. PEG 0.85 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 16 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $134.31 (implying +22% upside).
Moat
ROE 26% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 118% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Value re-rating depends on a catalyst. Without one — analyst day, divestiture, margin recovery, capital return — the stock can stay cheap on these multiples for years.
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 F and ALV diverge
On the headline score the gap is 36.3 points in favor of ALV. The widest single difference is Quality, where ALV leads by 53.7 points.
QualityF 26.9 · ALV 80.6ALV +53.7
ValueF 28.5 · ALV 62.6ALV +34.1
GrowthF 25.2 · ALV 50.0ALV +24.8
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 ALV or F the better stock?
ALV scores higher: ALV 63.2, F 26.9 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 ALV and F differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where ALV leads by 54 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. ALV leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are ALV and F 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.