COMPARE · Reviewed August 11, 2026
INSW vs PBF
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. INSW scored 65.6, PBF scored 66.4 — PBF leads.
Compare another set
INSW
International Seaways, Inc.
65.6
$89.06 · $4.4B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
0.8
PBF leads
PBF
PBF Energy Inc.
66.4
$69.35 · $8.2B
fundamentals as of
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
INSW
stronger →← stronger
PBF
93
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
70
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
61
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
84
INSW and PBF split the three pillars evenly.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
INSW
PBF
$484mC
FCF
$743mC+
+57.4%A
Rev
+13.5%B+
0.29A-
D/E
0.38B+
8.1xA-
P/E
6.1xA
Winner per row is the stronger grade in our model; a tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
INSW
PBF
25% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
9% below
~-8%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-4%/yr
+49%
1-yr DCF upside
+23%
+34%
5-yr DCF upside
+10%
+16%
10-yr DCF upside
-5%
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
PBF
Why this score
- Cyclical growth
The companies
INSWInternational Seaways, Inc.
Why now
Oil & Gas Midstream · market cap $4.4b. 9% off the 52-week high of $98.23. Revenue growing +57% — in hypergrowth territory. 6 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $98.67 (implying +11% 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
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.
PBFPBF Energy Inc.
Why now
Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing · market cap $8.2b. 7% off the 52-week high of $74.74. Revenue growing +14%, comfortably above the S&P median. 13 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $64.85 (implying -6% upside).
Moat
ROE 21% sits above Buffett's preferred 15% threshold — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately.
Risk
Net margin 3.9% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first. 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 INSW and PBF diverge
On the headline score the gap is 0.8 points in favour of PBF. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- QualityINSW 93.0 · PBF 70.0INSW +23.0
- ValueINSW 60.7 · PBF 83.6PBF +22.9
- GrowthINSW 50.0 · PBF 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.