Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. MSGE scored 58.6, NFLX scored 81.2 — NFLX leads.
Compare another set
MSGE
Madison Square Garden Entertainment Corp.
Entertainment · Quality-Growth
58.6
$80.84 · $3.8B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
22.6
NFLX leads
NFLX
Netflix, Inc.
Entertainment · Quality-Growth
81.2
$70.30 · $292.7B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestNFLX22.1x
Fastest growthNFLX+16.0%
Highest qualityNFLX92 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueMSGE-57%
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)
MSGE
stronger →← stronger
NFLX
83
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
92
86
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
89
28
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
65
NFLX is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
MSGE
NFLX
$323mC
FCF
$11.2bA-
+12.5%B+
Rev
+16.0%B+
—
D/E
0.55B+
58.6xC
P/E
22.1xB
11.16D
PEG
1.22B
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
MSGE
NFLX
57% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
117% above
~-11%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~30%/yr
+109%
1-yr DCF upside
-59%
+134%
5-yr DCF upside
-54%
+179%
10-yr DCF upside
-47%
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
MSGE
Why this score
Durable high returns
NFLX
Why this score
Durable high returns
The companies
MSGEMadison Square Garden Entertainment Corp.
Entertainment · $80.84 · beta 0.56
Why now
Entertainment · market cap $3.8b. 11% off the 52-week high of $90.41. Revenue growing +13%, comfortably above the S&P median. 8 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $91.63 (implying +13% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income, mostly because of cash released from working capital ($181m) — a release that doesn't repeat every year the way earnings can.
Risk
Trailing P/E 58.6x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating.
NFLXNetflix, Inc.
Entertainment · $70.30 · beta 1.61
Why now
Entertainment · market cap $292.7b. Down 44% from 52-week high of $124.86 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +16%, comfortably above the S&P median. 45 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $92.55 (implying +32% upside).
Moat
Net margin 28% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 45% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. $292.7b 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
Down 44% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 1.61 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
NFLX leads MSGE by 1.5 points (73.5 to 72.0), its sharpest advantage coming in FCF (grade A-). A contrarian could still prefer MSGE, which trades about 67% below our DCF fair value — a margin of safety the score doesn't reward.
Our AI analyst is busy right now, so this verdict is drawn directly from the pillars, grades and DCF above.
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 MSGE and NFLX diverge
On the headline score the gap is 22.6 points in favor of NFLX. The widest single difference is Value, where NFLX leads by 37.3 points.
ValueMSGE 28.1 · NFLX 65.4NFLX +37.3
QualityMSGE 83.5 · NFLX 92.3NFLX +8.8
GrowthMSGE 85.8 · NFLX 88.6level
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 NFLX or MSGE the better stock?
NFLX scores higher: NFLX 81.2, MSGE 58.6 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 NFLX and MSGE differ most?
The widest gap is value, where NFLX leads by 37 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. NFLX also leads quality, while growth is effectively level between them.
How are NFLX and MSGE 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.