Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. JBTM scored 68.3, GEV scored 69.4 — GEV leads.
Compare another set
JBTM
JBT Marel Corporation
Specialty Industrial Machinery · Quality-Growth
68.3
$107.08 · $5.6B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
1.1
GEV leads
GEV
GE Vernova Inc.
Specialty Industrial Machinery · Quality-Growth
69.4
$1,004.73 · $267.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestGEV28.8x
Fastest growthJBTM+121.3%
Strongest balance sheetGEV0.28
Highest qualityGEV80 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueJBTM-14%
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)
JBTM
stronger →← stronger
GEV
48
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
80
93
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
84
71
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
49
JBTM is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
JBTM
GEV
$310mC
FCF
$12.4bA-
+121.3%A
Rev
+13.0%B+
0.38B+
D/E
0.28A-
29.0xB
P/E
28.8xB
1.22B
PEG
1.96C+
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
JBTM
GEV
14% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
15% above
~7%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~12%/yr
-2%
1-yr DCF upside
-23%
+16%
5-yr DCF upside
-13%
+48%
10-yr DCF upside
+3%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Specialty Industrial Machinery · market cap $5.6b. Down 37% from 52-week high of $170.19 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +121% — in hypergrowth territory. 8 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $167.06 (implying +56% upside).
Moat
FCF converts 160% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Down 37% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Net margin 4.9% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first. ROE 4% is below the long-run sustainable threshold of ~10% — capital efficiency would need to improve for the equity base to compound at the market rate.
Specialty Industrial Machinery · market cap $267.6b. 16% off the 52-week high of $1195.94. Revenue growing +13%, comfortably above the S&P median. 33 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $1,225 (implying +22% 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. ROE 80% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 131% of net income, helped by cash released from working capital ($14.2b) that doesn't repeat every year.
Risk
Mature compounder — the risk is paying up for quality at a moment when growth is decelerating. Watch for sequential revenue + margin trends; the inflection from "compounder" to "ex-compounder" is hard to spot until the multiple already started compressing.
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 JBTM and GEV diverge
On the headline score the gap is 1.1 points in favor of GEV. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
QualityJBTM 48.0 · GEV 80.5GEV +32.5
ValueJBTM 71.1 · GEV 49.4JBTM +21.7
GrowthJBTM 93.4 · GEV 84.2JBTM +9.2
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 GEV or JBTM the better stock?
GEV scores higher: GEV 69.4, JBTM 68.3 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 GEV and JBTM differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where GEV leads by 33 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 GEV and JBTM 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.