Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. HESM scored 63.3, INSW scored 65.2 — INSW leads.
Compare another set
HESM
Hess Midstream LP
Oil & Gas Midstream · Quality-Growth
63.3
$32.26 · $6.7B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
1.9
INSW leads
INSW
International Seaways, Inc.
Oil & Gas Midstream · Quality-Growth
65.2
$119.82 · $5.9B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestINSW7.7x
Fastest growthINSW+57.4%
Strongest balance sheetINSW0.29
Highest qualityINSW94 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueHESM-68%
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)
HESM
stronger →← stronger
INSW
78
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
94
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
65
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
59
HESM and INSW split the three pillars evenly.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
HESM
INSW
$838mC+
FCF
$484mC
+8.4%B
Rev
+57.4%A
9.48D
D/E
0.29A-
11.1xB+
P/E
7.7xA-
2.20C
PEG
—
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
HESM
INSW
68% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
35% below
~-19%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-1%/yr
+197%
1-yr DCF upside
+34%
+215%
5-yr DCF upside
+54%
+244%
10-yr DCF upside
+89%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
HESM
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
Cyclical growth
INSW
Why this score
Raising its dividend
Cyclical growth
The companies
HESMHess Midstream LP
Oil & Gas Midstream · $32.26 · beta 0.56
Why now
Oil & Gas Midstream · market cap $6.7b. Down 22% from 52-week high of $41.44 — deep drawdown territory. 6 sell-side analysts rate this an Underperform with a mean 1-yr target of $37.50 (implying +16% upside).
Moat
Net margin 23% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income, mostly because of depreciation and amortization ($224m) — non-cash charges that hold down reported earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
D/E 9.48 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Dividend payout 105% of earnings on a 9.1% yield — distribution coverage is thin; one earnings stumble could force a dividend cut. Hedge-book exposure — many commodity producers hedge forward production; if the hedge book is concentrated at prices well below spot, the upside the market expects is already locked away.
INSWInternational Seaways, Inc.
Oil & Gas Midstream · $119.82 · beta -0.10
Why now
Oil & Gas Midstream · market cap $5.9b. Trading near 52-week high of $122.75 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. Revenue growing +57% — in hypergrowth territory. 6 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $119.83 (implying +0% upside).
Moat
Net margin 62% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 34% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which.
Risk
Trading within 2% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. Production-cost sensitivity — top-quartile cost producers generate cash through the cycle while marginal producers burn it; watch the cost-per-unit trend, not just headline revenue.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
INSW leads HESM by 3.6 points (64.4 to 60.8), its sharpest advantage coming in D/E (grade A-). A contrarian could still prefer HESM, which trades about 39% below our DCF fair value — a margin of safety the score doesn't reward. Note they play different roles — HESM screens as value, INSW screens as growth — so the model rewards different traits for each.
Our AI analyst is busy right now, so this verdict is drawn directly from the pillars, grades and DCF above.
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 HESM and INSW diverge
On the headline score the gap is 1.9 points in favor of INSW. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
QualityHESM 78.4 · INSW 93.6INSW +15.2
ValueHESM 64.6 · INSW 59.1HESM +5.5
GrowthHESM 50.0 · INSW 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 INSW or HESM the better stock?
INSW scores higher: INSW 65.2, HESM 63.3 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 INSW and HESM differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where INSW leads by 15 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 INSW and HESM 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.