Integrated Freight & Logistics · market cap $69.0b. 16% off the 52-week high of $345.37. 26 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $355.50 (implying +22% upside).
Moat
ROE 14% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 115% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash. $69.0b 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.
Risk
Net margin 4.7% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
KNXKnight-Swift Transportation Holdings Inc.
Trucking · $64.47 · beta 1.21
Why now
Trucking · market cap $10.5b. Down 22% from 52-week high of $82.86 — deep drawdown territory. PEG 0.24 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 20 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $85.70 (implying +33% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income, mostly because of depreciation and amortization ($788m) — non-cash charges that hold down reported earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
Net margin 0.6% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first. ROE 1% 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.
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 FDX and KNX diverge
On the headline score the gap is 26.1 points in favor of FDX. The widest single difference is Growth, where FDX leads by 34.4 points.
GrowthFDX 55.7 · KNX 21.3FDX +34.4
ValueFDX 68.7 · KNX 39.5FDX +29.2
QualityFDX 56.1 · KNX 45.9FDX +10.2
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 FDX or KNX the better stock?
FDX scores higher: FDX 59.9, KNX 33.8 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 FDX and KNX differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where FDX leads by 34 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. FDX leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are FDX and KNX 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.