COMPARE · Data as of August 12, 2026
AR vs MGY
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. AR scored 63.7, MGY scored 65.5 — MGY leads.
Compare another set
AR
Antero Resources Corporation
63.7
$37.48 · $11.5B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
1.8
MGY leads
MGY
Magnolia Oil & Gas Corporation
65.5
$26.36 · $6.4B
fundamentals as of
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
AR
stronger →← stronger
MGY
66
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
91
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
78
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
62
AR and MGY split the three pillars evenly.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
AR
MGY
$899mC+
FCF
$546mC+
+25.8%A-
Rev
+11.4%B
0.55B
D/E
0.19A-
10.8xB+
P/E
11.5xB+
0.49A
PEG
—
Winner per row is the stronger grade in our model; a tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
AR
MGY
11% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
48% below
~0%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-8%/yr
+14%
1-yr DCF upside
+76%
+12%
5-yr DCF upside
+91%
+11%
10-yr DCF upside
+118%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
AR
Why this score
- Cyclical growth
MGY
Why this score
- Raising its dividend
- Durable high returns
- Cyclical growth
The companies
ARAntero Resources Corporation
Why now
Oil & Gas E&P · market cap $11.5b. 18% off the 52-week high of $45.75. Revenue growing +26% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.49 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 20 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $49.10 (implying +31% upside).
Moat
Net margin 18% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 14% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere.
Risk
Jurisdictional + permitting risk — mining and extraction operations concentrate exposure to political stability, royalty regimes, and environmental review timelines that can stall production for years.
MGYMagnolia Oil & Gas Corporation
Why now
Oil & Gas E&P · market cap $6.4b. 20% off the 52-week high of $32.76. Revenue growing +11%, comfortably above the S&P median. 17 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $32.47 (implying +23% upside).
Moat
Net margin 29% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 20% sits above Buffett's preferred 15% threshold — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 128% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
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.
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 AR and MGY diverge
On the headline score the gap is 1.8 points in favour of MGY. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- QualityAR 66.2 · MGY 90.7MGY +24.5
- ValueAR 78.1 · MGY 61.8AR +16.3
- GrowthAR 50.0 · MGY 50.0level
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.