Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. LNG scored 58.8, PAGP scored 58.5 — LNG leads.
Compare another set
LNG
Cheniere Energy, Inc.
Oil & Gas Midstream · Quality-Growth
58.8
$278.18 · $57.5B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
0.3
LNG leads
PAGP
Plains GP Holdings, L.P.
Oil & Gas Midstream · Quality-Growth
58.5
$26.62 · $6.2B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestLNG21.0x
Fastest growthLNG+27.2%
Strongest balance sheetPAGP0.56
Highest qualityLNG82 / 100
Largest discount to fair valuePAGP-91%
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)
LNG
stronger →← stronger
PAGP
82
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
70
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
50
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
57
LNG and PAGP split the three pillars evenly.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
LNG
PAGP
$2.8bB
FCF
$2.4bB
+27.2%A-
Rev
+12.2%B+
2.43D
D/E
0.56B
21.0xC+
P/E
60.5xC
9.46D
PEG
0.67A-
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
LNG
PAGP
6% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
91% below
~12%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
decline
-19%
1-yr DCF upside
+888%
-5%
5-yr DCF upside
+1006%
+19%
10-yr DCF upside
+1211%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
LNG
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
Durable high returns
Cyclical growth
PAGP
Why this score
Raising its dividend
Cyclical growth
The companies
LNGCheniere Energy, Inc.
Oil & Gas Midstream · $278.18 · beta 0.06
Why now
Oil & Gas Midstream · market cap $57.5b. 8% off the 52-week high of $300.89. Revenue growing +27% — in hypergrowth territory. 21 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $310.57 (implying +12% upside).
Moat
Net margin 14% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 39% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 96% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
D/E 2.43 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Jurisdictional + permitting risk — mining and extraction operations concentrate exposure to political stability, royalty regimes, and environmental review timelines that can stall production for years.
PAGPPlains GP Holdings, L.P.
Oil & Gas Midstream · $26.62 · beta 0.52
Why now
Oil & Gas Midstream · market cap $6.2b. 7% off the 52-week high of $28.70. Revenue growing +12%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.67 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 13 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $26.38 (implying -1% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income.
Risk
Trailing P/E 60.5x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Dividend payout 363% of earnings on a 6.3% yield — distribution coverage is thin; one earnings stumble could force a dividend cut. Net margin 1.1% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
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 LNG and PAGP 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.
QualityLNG 81.8 · PAGP 70.0LNG +11.8
ValueLNG 49.6 · PAGP 57.3PAGP +7.7
GrowthLNG 50.0 · PAGP 50.0level
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 LNG or PAGP the better stock?
LNG scores higher: LNG 58.8, PAGP 58.5 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 LNG and PAGP differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where LNG leads by 12 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 LNG and PAGP 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.