COMPARE · Data as of August 27, 2026
LLY vs PAHC
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. LLY scored 70.4, PAHC scored 72.2 — PAHC leads.
Compare another set
LLY
Eli Lilly and Company
70.4
$1,176.10 · $1.0T
fundamentals as of
Score gap
1.8
PAHC leads
PAHC
Phibro Animal Health Corp
72.2
$36.35 · $1.5B
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestPAHC14.5x
- Fastest growthLLY+49.6%
- Strongest balance sheetLLY1.62
- Highest qualityLLY73 / 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)
LLY
stronger →← stronger
PAHC
73
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
61
97
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
86
49
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
72
LLY is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
LLY
PAHC
$13.6bA-
FCF
$13mC-
+49.6%A
Rev
+26.0%A-
1.62C
D/E
2.52D+
40.0xC+
P/E
14.5xB+
1.55C+
PEG
—
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
LLY
PAHC
99% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
392% above
~32%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~59%/yr
-62%
1-yr DCF upside
-85%
-50%
5-yr DCF upside
-80%
-22%
10-yr DCF upside
-70%
These two disagree on this pair: the Value pillar ranks cheapness against sector peers, while price-vs-fair-value is an absolute read. A name can be the better value in its sector and still the dearer one on cash flows.
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
LLY
Why this score
- Raising its dividend
PAHC
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
LLYEli Lilly and Company
Why now
Drug Manufacturers - General · market cap $1.0T. 9% off the 52-week high of $1292.65. Revenue growing +50% — in hypergrowth territory. 29 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $1,315 (implying +12% upside).
Moat
Net margin 34% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 79% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. $1.0T market cap places it among the largest companies in the sector — distribution, R&D, and customer-acquisition costs amortize across a base peers can't replicate.
Risk
Trailing P/E 40x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. P/S 13.2x embeds aggressive forward growth — disappointing top-line guidance would compress the multiple hard. Trial-readout binary — late-stage clinical trials carry approve/reject outcomes that swing valuation 30%+; the equity is effectively a portfolio of these binary events, not a steady cash-flow business.
PAHCPhibro Animal Health Corp
Why now
Pharmaceuticals · market cap $1.5b. Down 39% from 52-week high of $60.08 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +26% — in hypergrowth territory.
Moat
ROE 29% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. Pharma moat is patent runway + pipeline depth — a single approved molecule funds the next generation of bets. Late-stage trials carry binary readouts that swing valuation 30%+.
Risk
D/E 2.52 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Down 39% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Trial-readout binary — late-stage clinical trials carry approve/reject outcomes that swing valuation 30%+; the equity is effectively a portfolio of these binary events, not a steady cash-flow business.
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 LLY and PAHC diverge
On the headline score the gap is 1.8 points in favor of PAHC. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- ValueLLY 49.3 · PAHC 71.6PAHC +22.3
- QualityLLY 73.1 · PAHC 61.4LLY +11.7
- GrowthLLY 97.0 · PAHC 85.6LLY +11.4
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.