Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. HESM scored 63.3, PAGP scored 58.5 — HESM leads.
Compare another set
HESM
Hess Midstream LP
Oil & Gas Midstream · Quality-Growth
63.3
$32.26 · $6.7B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
4.8
HESM leads
PAGP
Plains GP Holdings, L.P.
Oil & Gas Midstream · Quality-Growth
58.5
$26.62 · $6.2B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestHESM11.1x
Fastest growthPAGP+12.2%
Strongest balance sheetPAGP0.56
Highest qualityHESM78 / 100
Largest discount to fair valuePAGP-91%
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
PAGP
78
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
70
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
65
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
57
HESM is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
HESM
PAGP
$838mC+
FCF
$2.4bB
+8.4%B
Rev
+12.2%B+
9.48D
D/E
0.56B
11.1xB+
P/E
60.5xC
2.20C
PEG
0.67A-
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
PAGP
68% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
91% below
~-19%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
decline
+197%
1-yr DCF upside
+888%
+215%
5-yr DCF upside
+1006%
+244%
10-yr DCF upside
+1211%
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
HESM
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
Cyclical growth
PAGP
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.
PAGPPlains GP Holdings, L.P.
Oil & Gas Midstream · $26.62 · beta 0.52
Why now
Oil & Gas Midstream · market cap $6.2b. 7% off the 52-week high of $28.70. Revenue growing +12%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.67 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 13 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $26.38 (implying -1% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income.
Risk
Trailing P/E 60.5x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Dividend payout 363% of earnings on a 6.3% yield — distribution coverage is thin; one earnings stumble could force a dividend cut. Net margin 1.1% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
HESM leads PAGP by 1.1 points (61.0 to 59.9), its sharpest advantage coming in P/E (grade B). A contrarian could still prefer PAGP, which trades about 91% below our DCF fair value — a margin of safety the score doesn't reward. Note they play different roles — HESM screens as value, PAGP 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 PAGP diverge
On the headline score the gap is 4.8 points in favor of HESM. The widest single difference is Quality, where HESM leads by 8.4 points.
QualityHESM 78.4 · PAGP 70.0HESM +8.4
ValueHESM 64.6 · PAGP 57.3HESM +7.3
GrowthHESM 50.0 · PAGP 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 HESM or PAGP the better stock?
HESM scores higher: HESM 63.3, PAGP 58.5 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 HESM and PAGP differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where HESM leads by 8 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. HESM also leads value, while growth is effectively level between them.
How are HESM and PAGP 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.