COMPARE · Data as of August 13, 2026
KEN vs OGS
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. KEN scored 61.6, OGS scored 64.0 — OGS leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. OGS's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but KEN's are as of March 2026 — a 3-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
KEN
Kenon Holdings Ltd.
61.6
$67.74 · $3.3B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
2.4
OGS leads
OGS
ONE Gas, Inc.
64
$81.01 · $5.1B
fundamentals as of
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
KEN
stronger →← stronger
OGS
57
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
46
85
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
82
48
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
70
KEN is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
KEN
OGS
-$26mF
FCF
-$173mF
+16.1%B+
Rev
+42.5%A
0.74A-
D/E
0.96A-
3.3xC+
P/S
2.0xB+
2.59C
PEG
1.05B+
Winner per row is the stronger grade in our model; a tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Model signals
KEN
Why this score
- Cut its dividend
- Short track record
OGS
Why this score
- Diluting shareholders
The companies
KENKenon Holdings Ltd.
Why now
Utilities - Independent Power Producers · market cap $3.3b. Down 29% from 52-week high of $95.93 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +16%, comfortably above the S&P median.
Moat
Higher-variance name — the moat signals on the quantitative card are modest, so the durability case rests on execution (turning current growth into durable earnings power) or an un-monetized asset (IP / network effects / first-mover position) rather than an entrenched competitive position.
Risk
Free cash flow is negative (-$26m) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk. Dividend payout 312% of earnings on a 6.0% yield — distribution coverage is thin; one earnings stumble could force a dividend cut. Trailing P/E 44x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
OGSONE Gas, Inc.
Why now
Utilities - Regulated Gas · market cap $5.1b. 11% off the 52-week high of $90.78. Revenue growing +43% — in hypergrowth territory. 8 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $90.63 (implying +12% upside).
Moat
Higher-variance name — the moat signals on the quantitative card are modest, so the durability case rests on execution (turning current growth into durable earnings power) or an un-monetized asset (IP / network effects / first-mover position) rather than an entrenched competitive position.
Risk
Free cash flow is negative (-$173m) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk. Jurisdictional + permitting risk — mining and extraction operations concentrate exposure to political stability, royalty regimes, and environmental review timelines that can stall production for years.
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 KEN and OGS diverge
On the headline score the gap is 2.4 points in favour of OGS. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- ValueKEN 47.8 · OGS 69.7OGS +21.9
- QualityKEN 57.4 · OGS 46.0KEN +11.4
- GrowthKEN 85.1 · OGS 82.0KEN +3.1
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.