Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. HESM scored 63.3, TNK scored 57.1 — HESM leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. HESM's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but TNK'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.
HESM
Hess Midstream LP
Oil & Gas Midstream · Quality-Growth
63.3
$32.26 · $6.7B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
6.2
HESM leads
TNK
Teekay Tankers Ltd.
Oil & Gas Midstream · Quality-Growth
57.1
$106.14 · $3.7B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestTNK6.3x
Fastest growthHESM+8.4%
Strongest balance sheetTNK0.02
Highest qualityHESM78 / 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
TNK
78
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
71
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
41
65
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
64
HESM is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
HESM
TNK
$838mC+
FCF
$116mC
+8.4%B
Rev
-22.6%F
9.48D
D/E
0.02A
11.1xB+
P/E
6.3xA
2.20C
PEG
1.10B+
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
TNK
68% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
163% above
~-19%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~23%/yr
+197%
1-yr DCF upside
-57%
+215%
5-yr DCF upside
-62%
+244%
10-yr DCF upside
-68%
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
TNK
No notable signals flagged.
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.
TNKTeekay Tankers Ltd.
Oil & Gas Midstream · $106.14 · beta -0.12
Why now
Oil & Gas Midstream · market cap $3.7b. Trading near 52-week high of $107.39 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. Revenue -23% — in contraction; any catalyst that reverses this triggers re-rating. 5 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $96.80 (implying -9% upside).
Moat
Net margin 37% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 17% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately.
Risk
Revenue contracting -23% — the operational turn is not yet visible in the top line. Trading within 1% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. Commodity exposure — earnings power tracks the price of the underlying commodity, not management execution. A 15-20% move in the commodity reprices the equity well before fundamentals catch 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 HESM and TNK diverge
On the headline score the gap is 6.2 points in favor of HESM. The widest single difference is Growth, where HESM leads by 8.7 points.
GrowthHESM 50.0 · TNK 41.3HESM +8.7
QualityHESM 78.4 · TNK 70.9HESM +7.5
ValueHESM 64.6 · TNK 63.7level
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 TNK the better stock?
HESM scores higher: HESM 63.3, TNK 57.1 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 TNK differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where HESM leads by 9 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. HESM also leads quality, while value is effectively level between them.
How are HESM and TNK 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.