Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. KYIV scored 72.0, T scored 56.0 — KYIV leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. T's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but KYIV'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.
KYIV
Kyivstar Group Ltd.
Telecom Services · Quality-Growth
72
$12.10 · $2.8B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
16.0
KYIV leads
T
AT&T Inc.
Telecom Services · Quality-Growth
56
$22.18 · $152.0B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestT7.3x
Fastest growthKYIV+25.9%
Strongest balance sheetKYIV0.39
Highest qualityT70 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueKYIV-56%
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)
KYIV
stronger →← stronger
T
67
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
70
87
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
43
73
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
58
KYIV is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
KYIV
T
$311mC
FCF
$18.0bA-
+25.9%A-
Rev
+2.6%C
0.39B+
D/E
1.29C+
17.3xB
P/E
7.3xA-
1.21B
PEG
1.51C+
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
KYIV
T
56% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
42% below
~-8%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-10%/yr
+88%
1-yr DCF upside
+74%
+125%
5-yr DCF upside
+71%
+192%
10-yr DCF upside
+68%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
KYIV
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
Short track record
T
Why this score
Buying back stock
The companies
KYIVKyivstar Group Ltd.
Telecom Services · $12.10
Why now
Telecom Services · market cap $2.8b. Down 27% from 52-week high of $16.55 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +26% — in hypergrowth territory. 9 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $17.93 (implying +48% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income.
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.
TAT&T Inc.
Telecom Services · $22.18 · beta 0.44
Why now
Telecom Services · market cap $152.0b. Down 25% from 52-week high of $29.44 — deep drawdown territory. 24 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $28.77 (implying +30% 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 17% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. $152.0b 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
Value re-rating depends on a catalyst. Without one — analyst day, divestiture, margin recovery, capital return — the stock can stay cheap on these multiples 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 KYIV and T diverge
On the headline score the gap is 16.0 points in favor of KYIV. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
GrowthKYIV 87.1 · T 43.3KYIV +43.8
ValueKYIV 73.5 · T 57.7KYIV +15.8
QualityKYIV 67.1 · T 70.2T +3.1
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 KYIV or T the better stock?
KYIV scores higher: KYIV 72.0, T 56.0 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 KYIV and T differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where KYIV leads by 44 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 KYIV and T 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.