Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. GLNG scored 35.2, OKE scored 58.3 — OKE leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. OKE's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but GLNG's are as of December 2025 — a 6-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
GLNG
Golar LNG Limited
Oil & Gas Midstream · Quality-Growth
35.2
$47.92 · $4.9B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
23.1
OKE leads
OKE
ONEOK, Inc.
Oil & Gas Midstream · Quality-Growth
58.3
$89.80 · $56.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestOKE15.5x
Fastest growthGLNG+51.1%
Strongest balance sheetGLNG1.22
Highest qualityOKE66 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueOKE-27%
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)
GLNG
stronger →← stronger
OKE
53
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
66
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
16
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
60
OKE is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
GLNG
OKE
$254mC
FCF
$2.8bB
+51.1%A
Rev
+40.8%A
1.22C
D/E
1.43C
32.8xC
P/E
15.5xB
—
PEG
1.71C+
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
GLNG
OKE
17% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
27% below
~10%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~7%/yr
-20%
1-yr DCF upside
+5%
-14%
5-yr DCF upside
+38%
-7%
10-yr DCF upside
+105%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
GLNG
Why this score
Buying back stock
Cyclical growth
OKE
Why this score
Cyclical growth
The companies
GLNGGolar LNG Limited
Oil & Gas Midstream · $47.92 · beta 0.12
Why now
Oil & Gas Midstream · market cap $4.9b. 17% off the 52-week high of $57.79. Revenue growing +51% — in hypergrowth territory. 8 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $66.31 (implying +38% 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. Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income.
Risk
Trailing P/E 33x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. P/S 12.4x embeds aggressive forward growth — disappointing top-line guidance would compress the multiple hard. ROE 3% 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.
OKEONEOK, Inc.
Oil & Gas Midstream · $89.80 · beta 0.80
Why now
Oil & Gas Midstream · market cap $56.6b. 10% off the 52-week high of $99.85. Revenue growing +41% — in hypergrowth territory. 20 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $101.20 (implying +13% upside).
Moat
ROE 16% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. $56.6b 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
Dividend payout 73% of earnings on a 4.7% yield — distribution coverage is thin; one earnings stumble could force a dividend cut. Jurisdictional + permitting risk — mining and extraction operations concentrate exposure to political stability, royalty regimes, and environmental review timelines that can stall production 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 GLNG and OKE diverge
On the headline score the gap is 23.1 points in favor of OKE. The widest single difference is Value, where OKE leads by 43.3 points.
ValueGLNG 16.5 · OKE 59.8OKE +43.3
QualityGLNG 53.2 · OKE 66.4OKE +13.2
GrowthGLNG 50.0 · OKE 50.0level
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 OKE or GLNG the better stock?
OKE scores higher: OKE 58.3, GLNG 35.2 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 OKE and GLNG differ most?
The widest gap is value, where OKE leads by 43 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. OKE also leads quality, while growth is effectively level between them.
How are OKE and GLNG 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.