Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. MWH scored 72.0, CEPU scored 66.0 — MWH leads.
Compare another set
MWH
SOLV Energy, Inc.
Utilities - Renewable · Quality-Growth
72
$26.21 · $5.3B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
6.0
MWH leads
CEPU
Central Puerto S.A.
Utilities - Regulated Electric · Quality-Growth
66
$12.64 · $1.9B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestCEPU5.5x
Fastest growthMWH+34.8%
Strongest balance sheetMWH0.10
Highest qualityMWH74 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueMWH-23%
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)
MWH
stronger →← stronger
CEPU
74
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
70
95
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
86
75
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
86
MWH is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
MWH
CEPU
$295mC
FCF
$40mC-
+34.8%A
Rev
+13.0%B+
0.10A
D/E
0.33A
55.8xD
P/E
5.5xA
1.65C+
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
MWH
CEPU
23% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
158% above
~9%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~34%/yr
-1%
1-yr DCF upside
-66%
+29%
5-yr DCF upside
-61%
+90%
10-yr DCF upside
-54%
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
MWH
Why this score
Short track record
CEPU
Why this score
Cut its dividend
Foreign reporter (ARS)
The companies
MWHSOLV Energy, Inc.
Utilities - Renewable · $26.21
Why now
Utilities - Renewable · market cap $5.3b. Down 46% from 52-week high of $48.40 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +35% — in hypergrowth territory. 11 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $43.73 (implying +67% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income, mostly because of depreciation and amortization ($96m) — non-cash charges that hold down reported earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
Trailing P/E 55.8x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Down 46% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Net margin 3.8% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
CEPUCentral Puerto S.A.
Utilities - Regulated Electric · $12.64 · beta -0.18
Why now
Utilities - Regulated Electric · market cap $1.9b. Down 32% from 52-week high of $18.50 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +13%, comfortably above the S&P median. 5 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $23.81 (implying +88% 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 19% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately.
Risk
Down 32% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
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 MWH and CEPU diverge
On the headline score the gap is 6.0 points in favor of MWH. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
ValueMWH 74.9 · CEPU 86.0CEPU +11.1
GrowthMWH 95.4 · CEPU 86.2MWH +9.2
QualityMWH 74.2 · CEPU 70.2MWH +4.0
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 MWH or CEPU the better stock?
MWH scores higher: MWH 72.0, CEPU 66.0 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 MWH and CEPU differ most?
The widest gap is value, where CEPU leads by 11 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 MWH and CEPU 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.