Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. KNF scored 49.2, EXP scored 49.0 — KNF leads.
Compare another set
KNF
Knife River Corporation
Building Materials · Quality-Growth
49.2
$49.84 · $2.8B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
0.2
KNF leads
EXP
Eagle Materials Inc.
Building Materials · Quality-Growth
49
$164.70 · $5.1B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestEXP13.2x
Fastest growthKNF+12.1%
Strongest balance sheetKNF1.04
Highest qualityEXP72 / 100
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)
KNF
stronger →← stronger
EXP
45
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
72
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
37
53
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
45
KNF is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
KNF
EXP
$43mC-
FCF
$171mC
+12.1%B+
Rev
+1.7%C
1.04C
D/E
1.21C
20.3xB
P/E
13.2xB+
1.62C+
PEG
2.09C
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
KNF
EXP
170% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
163% above
~31%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~28%/yr
-65%
1-yr DCF upside
-61%
-63%
5-yr DCF upside
-62%
-59%
10-yr DCF upside
-63%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
KNF
Why this score
Cyclical growth
EXP
Why this score
Buying back stock
Durable high returns
The companies
KNFKnife River Corporation
Building Materials · $49.84 · beta 0.60
Why now
Building Materials · market cap $2.8b. Down 48% from 52-week high of $96.28 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +12%, comfortably above the S&P median. 8 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $78.75 (implying +58% upside).
Moat
Mining moat is reserve quality + extraction cost per unit — top-quartile cost producers generate cash through the commodity cycle while marginal producers burn it.
Risk
Down 48% 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 4.2% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first. Hedge-book exposure — many commodity producers hedge forward production; if the hedge book is concentrated at prices well below spot, the upside the market expects is already locked away.
EXPEagle Materials Inc.
Building Materials · $164.70 · beta 1.33
Why now
Building Materials · market cap $5.1b. Down 33% from 52-week high of $245.53 — deep drawdown territory. 10 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $201.50 (implying +22% upside).
Moat
Net margin 17% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 27% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. Mining moat is reserve quality + extraction cost per unit — top-quartile cost producers generate cash through the commodity cycle while marginal producers burn it.
Risk
Down 33% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. 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.
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 KNF and EXP diverge
The two are effectively level on the headline score. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
QualityKNF 44.9 · EXP 71.8EXP +26.9
GrowthKNF 50.0 · EXP 36.8KNF +13.2
ValueKNF 52.9 · EXP 44.5KNF +8.4
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 KNF or EXP the better stock?
KNF scores higher: KNF 49.2, EXP 49.0 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 KNF and EXP differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where EXP leads by 27 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 KNF and EXP 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.