COMPARE · Data as of August 27, 2026
FDX vs KNX
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. FDX scored 61.4, KNX scored 42.2 — FDX leads.
Compare another set
FDX
FedEx Corporation
61.4
$331.41 · $78.4B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
19.2
FDX leads
KNX
Knight-Swift Transportation Holdings Inc.
42.2
$69.55 · $11.3B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- Fastest growthFDX+7.7%
- Strongest balance sheetKNX0.38
- Highest qualityFDX56 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueFDX-2%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
FDX
stronger →← stronger
KNX
56
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
45
61
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
24
67
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
70
FDX is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
FDX
KNX
$5.1bB+
FCF
$470mC
+7.7%B
Rev
+1.1%C
1.36C
D/E
0.38B+
17.9xA-
P/E
—
1.41B
PEG
0.51A-
—
P/S
1.5xB+
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
FDX
KNX
2% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
18% above
~10%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~19%/yr
-14%
1-yr DCF upside
-36%
+2%
5-yr DCF upside
-16%
+32%
10-yr DCF upside
+25%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
FDX
No notable signals flagged.
KNX
Why this score
- Raising its dividend
The companies
FDXFedEx Corporation
Why now
Integrated Freight & Logistics · market cap $78.4b. 4% off the 52-week high of $345.37. 26 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $356.37 (implying +8% upside).
Moat
ROE 14% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 115% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined. $78.4b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
Risk
Net margin 4.7% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
KNXKnight-Swift Transportation Holdings Inc.
Why now
Trucking · market cap $11.3b. 16% off the 52-week high of $82.86. PEG 0.51 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 19 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $88.63 (implying +27% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income — non-cash charges (depreciation, intangible amortization) are holding down GAAP earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
Net margin 0.5% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first. ROE 0% 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.
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 FDX and KNX diverge
On the headline score the gap is 19.2 points in favor of FDX. The widest single difference is Growth, where FDX leads by 37.5 points.
- GrowthFDX 61.4 · KNX 23.9FDX +37.5
- QualityFDX 55.9 · KNX 45.3FDX +10.6
- ValueFDX 67.3 · KNX 69.5level
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.