COMPARE · Data as of August 27, 2026
GSL vs GXO
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. GSL scored 65.5, GXO scored 50.6 — GSL leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. GXO's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but GSL'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.
GSL
Global Ship Lease, Inc.
65.5
$44.82 · $1.6B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
14.9
GSL leads
GXO
GXO Logistics, Inc.
50.6
$47.98 · $5.5B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestGSL4.4x
- Fastest growthGSL+7.8%
- Strongest balance sheetGSL0.35
- Highest qualityGSL88 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueGSL-78%
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)
GSL
stronger →← stronger
GXO
88
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
39
44
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
62
72
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
53
GSL is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
GSL
GXO
$521mC+
FCF
$180mC
+7.8%B
Rev
+7.6%B
0.35A-
D/E
2.02C
4.4xA
P/E
42.5xC
0.87B+
PEG
1.29B
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
GSL
GXO
78% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
122% above
decline
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~32%/yr
+401%
1-yr DCF upside
-62%
+350%
5-yr DCF upside
-55%
+287%
10-yr DCF upside
-43%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
GSL
Why this score
- Raising its dividend
- Durable high returns
GXO
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
GSLGlobal Ship Lease, Inc.
Why now
Marine Shipping · market cap $1.6b. Trading near 52-week high of $45.45 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. PEG 0.87 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 3 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $51.00 (implying +14% upside).
Moat
Net margin 54% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 23% sits above Buffett's preferred 15% threshold — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 125% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Trading within 1% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction.
GXOGXO Logistics, Inc.
Why now
Integrated Freight & Logistics · market cap $5.5b. Down 28% from 52-week high of $66.85 — deep drawdown territory. 17 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $68.71 (implying +43% upside).
Moat
FCF converts 137% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
D/E 2.02 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Beta 1.55 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. Trailing P/E 42x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
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 GSL and GXO diverge
On the headline score the gap is 14.9 points in favor of GSL. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- QualityGSL 88.3 · GXO 39.2GSL +49.1
- ValueGSL 72.1 · GXO 53.3GSL +18.8
- GrowthGSL 44.2 · GXO 62.2GXO +18.0
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.