Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. GNTX scored 71.4, XPEV scored 25.4 — GNTX leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. GNTX's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but XPEV'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.
GNTX
Gentex Corporation
Auto Parts · Quality-Growth
71.4
$21.04 · $4.4B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
46.0
GNTX leads
XPEV
XPeng Inc.
Auto Manufacturers · Quality-Growth
25.4
$9.90 · $9.5B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Fastest growthXPEV+87.7%
Strongest balance sheetGNTX0.00
Highest qualityGNTX86 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueGNTX-52%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
GNTX
stronger →← stronger
XPEV
86
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
28
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
84
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
21
GNTX is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
GNTX
XPEV
$497mC
FCF
$735mC+
+10.1%B
Rev
+87.7%A
0.00A
D/E
0.99B
11.1xA-
P/E
—
0.62A-
PEG
—
—
P/S
0.8xB+
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
GNTX
XPEV
52% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
41% below
~-11%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~2%/yr
+97%
1-yr DCF upside
+31%
+109%
5-yr DCF upside
+71%
+129%
10-yr DCF upside
+150%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
GNTX
Why this score
Buying back stock
Durable high returns
Cyclical growth
XPEV
Why this score
Cyclical growth
Foreign reporter (CNY)
The companies
GNTXGentex Corporation
Auto Parts · $21.04 · beta 0.85
Why now
Auto Parts · market cap $4.4b. Down 22% from 52-week high of $26.99 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +10%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.62 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 9 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $27.28 (implying +30% upside).
Moat
Net margin 15% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 16% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 122% 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.
XPEVXPeng Inc.
Auto Manufacturers · $9.90 · beta 1.07
Why now
Auto Manufacturers · market cap $9.5b. Down 65% from 52-week high of $28.23 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +88% — in hypergrowth territory. 25 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $18.46 (implying +86% 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
Currently unprofitable (margin -1.5%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk. Down 65% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. ROE -4% 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 GNTX and XPEV diverge
On the headline score the gap is 46.0 points in favor of GNTX. The widest single difference is Value, where GNTX leads by 62.9 points.
ValueGNTX 84.3 · XPEV 21.4GNTX +62.9
QualityGNTX 86.4 · XPEV 27.9GNTX +58.5
GrowthGNTX 50.0 · XPEV 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 GNTX or XPEV the better stock?
GNTX scores higher: GNTX 71.4, XPEV 25.4 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 GNTX and XPEV differ most?
The widest gap is value, where GNTX leads by 63 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. GNTX also leads quality, while growth is effectively level between them.
How are GNTX and XPEV 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.