Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. MOS scored 19.9, CF scored 70.3 — CF leads.
Compare another set
MOS
The Mosaic Company
Agricultural Inputs · Quality-Growth
19.9
$18.74 · $6.0B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
50.4
CF leads
CF
CF Industries Holdings, Inc.
Agricultural Inputs · Quality-Growth
70.3
$111.54 · $16.9B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Fastest growthCF+19.3%
Strongest balance sheetCF0.41
Highest qualityCF91 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueCF-68%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
MOS
stronger →← stronger
CF
32
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
91
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
5
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
77
CF is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
MOS
CF
-$947mF
FCF
$1.9bC+
+8.8%B
Rev
+19.3%B+
0.52C+
D/E
0.41B
0.5xA
P/S
—
2.02C
PEG
0.49A
—
P/E
8.3xA-
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
MOS
CF
—
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
68% below
—
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-18%/yr
—
1-yr DCF upside
+186%
—
5-yr DCF upside
+216%
—
10-yr DCF upside
+269%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
MOS
Why this score
Cyclical growth
CF
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
Cyclical growth
The companies
MOSThe Mosaic Company
Agricultural Inputs · $18.74 · beta 0.92
Why now
Agricultural Inputs · market cap $6.0b. Down 42% from 52-week high of $32.25 — deep drawdown territory. 18 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $26.66 (implying +42% upside).
Moat
Turnaround / out-of-favor name — GAAP-unprofitable for now, so the durability case is forward-looking: it rests on a recovery (margin normalization, a cyclical upturn or restructuring) or an un-monetized asset (IP / network effects / first-mover position) rather than on current reported results.
Risk
Free cash flow is negative (-$947m) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk. Currently unprofitable (margin -5.2%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk. Down 42% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
CFCF Industries Holdings, Inc.
Agricultural Inputs · $111.54 · beta 0.53
Why now
Agricultural Inputs · market cap $16.9b. Down 21% from 52-week high of $141.96 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +19%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.49 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 20 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $127.69 (implying +14% upside).
Moat
Net margin 27% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 30% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which.
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 MOS and CF diverge
On the headline score the gap is 50.4 points in favor of CF. The widest single difference is Value, where CF leads by 71.6 points.
ValueMOS 5.0 · CF 76.6CF +71.6
QualityMOS 31.6 · CF 90.9CF +59.3
GrowthMOS 50.0 · CF 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 CF or MOS the better stock?
CF scores higher: CF 70.3, MOS 19.9 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 CF and MOS differ most?
The widest gap is value, where CF leads by 72 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. CF also leads quality, while growth is effectively level between them.
How are CF and MOS 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.