COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
FRO vs PAGP
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. FRO scored 33.0, PAGP scored 57.5 — PAGP leads.
Compare another set
FRO
Frontline plc
33
$43.67 · $9.7B
Score gap
24.5
PAGP leads
PAGP
Plains GP Holdings, L.P.
57.5
$26.84 · $6.3B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestFRO10.8x
- Fastest growthFRO+49.5%
- Strongest balance sheetPAGP0.56
- Highest qualityPAGP59 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valuePAGP-86%
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)
FRO
stronger →← stronger
PAGP
50
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
59
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
14
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
65
PAGP is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
FRO
PAGP
$592mC+
FCF
$2.4bB
+49.5%A
Rev
+12.2%B+
0.93C+
D/E
0.56B
10.8xB+
P/E
76.7xD
5.58D
PEG
0.67A-
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
FRO
PAGP
35% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
86% below
~6%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
decline
-17%
1-yr DCF upside
+519%
-26%
5-yr DCF upside
+614%
-36%
10-yr DCF upside
+778%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
FRO
Why this score
- Raising its dividend
- Cyclical growth
PAGP
Why this score
- Raising its dividend
- Cyclical growth
The companies
FROFrontline plc
Why now
Oil & Gas Midstream · market cap $9.7b. 3% off the 52-week high of $45.17. Revenue growing +49% — in hypergrowth territory. 4 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $44.25 (implying +1% upside).
Moat
Moat signals from the quantitative card are modest — profitability and capital efficiency are middle-of-pack. The thesis here depends on softer factors (switching costs, brand, distribution, regulatory protection) not captured by the quality-growth screen.
Risk
Currently unprofitable (margin -1.7%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk. P/S 15.2x embeds aggressive forward growth — disappointing top-line guidance would compress the multiple hard. 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.
PAGPPlains GP Holdings, L.P.
Why now
Oil & Gas Midstream · market cap $6.3b. Trading near 52-week high of $27.17 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. Revenue growing +12%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.67 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 14 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $24.86 (implying -7% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income — non-cash charges (depreciation, intangible amortization) are holding down GAAP earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
Trailing P/E 76.7x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Trading within 1% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. Dividend payout 456% of earnings on a 6.3% yield — distribution coverage is thin; one earnings stumble could force a dividend cut.
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 FRO and PAGP diverge
On the headline score the gap is 24.5 points in favor of PAGP. The widest single difference is Value, where PAGP leads by 50.2 points.
- ValueFRO 14.3 · PAGP 64.5PAGP +50.2
- QualityFRO 50.2 · PAGP 58.8PAGP +8.6
- GrowthFRO 50.0 · PAGP 50.0level
Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a 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.