Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. HEI-A scored 72.9, PAC scored 58.0 — HEI-A leads.
Compare another set
HEI-A
HEICO Corporation
Aerospace & Defense · Quality-Growth
72.9
$223.05 · $31.2B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
14.9
HEI-A leads
PAC
Grupo Aeroportuario del Pacífico, S.A.B. de C.V.
Airports & Air Services · Quality-Growth
58
$201.50 · $12.0B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestPAC17.9x
Fastest growthPAC+23.2%
Strongest balance sheetHEI-A0.45
Highest qualityHEI-A83 / 100
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)
HEI-A
stronger →← stronger
PAC
83
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
77
85
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
55
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
69
HEI-A is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
HEI-A
PAC
$1.0bC+
FCF
$252mC
+16.3%B+
Rev
+23.2%A-
0.45B+
D/E
1.18C
37.2xC
P/E
17.9xA-
1.52C+
PEG
1.07B+
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
HEI-A
PAC
60% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
147% above
~24%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~34%/yr
-48%
1-yr DCF upside
-65%
-37%
5-yr DCF upside
-60%
-19%
10-yr DCF upside
-50%
These two disagree on this pair: the Value pillar ranks cheapness against sector peers, while price-vs-fair-value is an absolute read. A name can be the better value in its sector and still the dearer one on cash flows.
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
HEI-A
Why this score
Durable high returns
PAC
Why this score
Durable high returns
Cyclical growth
Foreign reporter (MXN)
The companies
HEI-AHEICO Corporation
Aerospace & Defense · $223.05 · beta 1.09
Why now
Aerospace & Defense · market cap $31.2b. Down 20% from 52-week high of $279.66 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +16%, comfortably above the S&P median.
Moat
Net margin 16% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 18% 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
Trailing P/E 37x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
PACGrupo Aeroportuario del Pacífico, S.A.B. de C.V.
Airports & Air Services · $201.50 · beta 0.30
Why now
Airports & Air Services · market cap $12.0b. Down 33% from 52-week high of $300.41 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +23%, comfortably above the S&P median. 7 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $254.49 (implying +26% upside).
Moat
Net margin 31% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 28% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which.
Risk
Down 33% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
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 HEI-A and PAC diverge
On the headline score the gap is 14.9 points in favor of HEI-A. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
GrowthHEI-A 85.3 · PAC 50.0HEI-A +35.3
ValueHEI-A 54.8 · PAC 69.1PAC +14.3
QualityHEI-A 82.7 · PAC 77.3HEI-A +5.4
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 HEI-A or PAC the better stock?
HEI-A scores higher: HEI-A 72.9, PAC 58.0 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 HEI-A and PAC differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where HEI-A leads by 35 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 HEI-A and PAC 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.