COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
INSW vs PAGP
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. INSW scored 69.2, PAGP scored 57.5 — INSW leads.
Compare another set
INSW
International Seaways, Inc.
69.2
$99.52 · $4.9B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
11.7
INSW leads
PAGP
Plains GP Holdings, L.P.
57.5
$26.84 · $6.3B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestINSW6.4x
- Fastest growthINSW+57.4%
- Strongest balance sheetINSW0.29
- Highest qualityINSW93 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valuePAGP-86%
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)
INSW
stronger →← stronger
PAGP
93
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
59
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
71
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
65
INSW is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
INSW
PAGP
$484mC
FCF
$2.4bB
+57.4%A
Rev
+12.2%B+
0.29A-
D/E
0.56B
6.4xA
P/E
76.7xD
—
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
INSW
PAGP
17% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
86% below
~-6%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
decline
+33%
1-yr DCF upside
+519%
+20%
5-yr DCF upside
+614%
+3%
10-yr DCF upside
+778%
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
INSW
Why this score
- Raising its dividend
- Cyclical growth
PAGP
Why this score
- Raising its dividend
- Cyclical growth
The companies
INSWInternational Seaways, Inc.
Why now
Oil & Gas Midstream · market cap $4.9b. Trading near 52-week high of $102.36 — 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 $100.00 (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 3% 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.
PAGPPlains GP Holdings, L.P.
Why now
Oil & Gas Midstream · market cap $6.3b. Trading near 52-week high of $27.17 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. Revenue growing +12%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.67 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 14 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $24.86 (implying -7% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income — non-cash charges (depreciation, intangible amortization) are holding down GAAP earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
Trailing P/E 76.7x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Trading within 1% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. Dividend payout 456% of earnings on a 6.3% yield — distribution coverage is thin; one earnings stumble could force a dividend cut.
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 INSW and PAGP diverge
On the headline score the gap is 11.7 points in favor of INSW. The widest single difference is Quality, where INSW leads by 34.6 points.
- QualityINSW 93.4 · PAGP 58.8INSW +34.6
- ValueINSW 71.0 · PAGP 64.5INSW +6.5
- GrowthINSW 50.0 · PAGP 50.0level
Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a 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.