Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. HAFN scored 60.8, ZTO scored 64.9 — ZTO leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. HAFN's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but ZTO'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.
HAFN
Hafnia Limited
Marine Shipping · Quality-Growth
60.8
$10.72 · $5.7B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
4.1
ZTO leads
ZTO
ZTO Express (Cayman) Inc.
Integrated Freight & Logistics · Quality-Growth
64.9
$20.15 · $15.1B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestHAFN8.3x
Fastest growthZTO+10.9%
Strongest balance sheetHAFN0.33
Highest qualityHAFN93 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueHAFN-19%
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)
HAFN
stronger →← stronger
ZTO
93
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
76
27
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
80
89
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
81
HAFN is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
HAFN
ZTO
$584mC+
FCF
$891mC+
-20.5%F
Rev
+10.9%B
0.33A-
D/E
0.35A-
8.3xA
P/E
11.0xA
—
PEG
1.01B+
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
HAFN
ZTO
19% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
3% below
~-6%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~7%/yr
+38%
1-yr DCF upside
-6%
+23%
5-yr DCF upside
+3%
+5%
10-yr DCF upside
+18%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
HAFN
Why this score
Raising its dividend
Short track record
ZTO
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
Foreign reporter (CNY)
The companies
HAFNHafnia Limited
Marine Shipping · $10.72 · beta -0.19
Why now
Marine Shipping · market cap $5.7b. Trading near 52-week high of $10.89 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. Revenue -20% — in contraction; any catalyst that reverses this triggers re-rating.
Moat
Net margin 25% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 27% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which.
Risk
Revenue contracting -20% — the operational turn is not yet visible in the top line. Trading within 2% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction.
Integrated Freight & Logistics · market cap $15.1b. Down 23% from 52-week high of $26.20 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +11%, comfortably above the S&P median. 18 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $27.88 (implying +38% upside).
Moat
Net margin 18% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 14% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere.
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.
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 HAFN and ZTO diverge
On the headline score the gap is 4.1 points in favor of ZTO. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
GrowthHAFN 27.1 · ZTO 79.8ZTO +52.7
QualityHAFN 92.7 · ZTO 76.3HAFN +16.4
ValueHAFN 89.5 · ZTO 81.3HAFN +8.2
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 ZTO or HAFN the better stock?
ZTO scores higher: ZTO 64.9, HAFN 60.8 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 ZTO and HAFN differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where ZTO leads by 53 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. Neither name sweeps: they trade the lead across the three pillars, so the comparison is a trade-off rather than one being better on every measure.
How are ZTO and HAFN 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.