Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. INSW scored 65.2, TNK scored 57.1 — INSW leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. INSW'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.
INSW
International Seaways, Inc.
Oil & Gas Midstream · Quality-Growth
65.2
$119.82 · $5.9B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
8.1
INSW 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 growthINSW+57.4%
Strongest balance sheetTNK0.02
Highest qualityINSW94 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueINSW-35%
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
TNK
94
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
71
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
41
59
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
64
INSW is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
INSW
TNK
$484mC
FCF
$116mC
+57.4%A
Rev
-22.6%F
0.29A-
D/E
0.02A
7.7xA-
P/E
6.3xA
—
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
INSW
TNK
35% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
163% above
~-1%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~23%/yr
+34%
1-yr DCF upside
-57%
+54%
5-yr DCF upside
-62%
+89%
10-yr DCF upside
-68%
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
TNK
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
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.
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 INSW and TNK diverge
On the headline score the gap is 8.1 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.
QualityINSW 93.6 · TNK 70.9INSW +22.7
GrowthINSW 50.0 · TNK 41.3INSW +8.7
ValueINSW 59.1 · TNK 63.7TNK +4.6
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 TNK the better stock?
INSW scores higher: INSW 65.2, 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 INSW and TNK differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where INSW leads by 23 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 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.