Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. MWH scored 72.0, NEE scored 58.3 — MWH leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. MWH's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but NEE's are as of March 2026 — a 3-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
MWH
SOLV Energy, Inc.
Utilities - Renewable · Quality-Growth
72
$26.21 · $5.3B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
13.7
MWH leads
NEE
NextEra Energy, Inc.
Utilities - Regulated Electric · Quality-Growth
58.3
$77.38 · $161.4B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestNEE17.4x
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
NEE
74
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
60
95
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
66
75
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
50
MWH is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
MWH
NEE
$295mC
FCF
$3.0bB
+34.8%A
Rev
+8.3%B
0.10A
D/E
1.62C+
55.8xD
P/E
17.4xB+
1.65C+
PEG
1.58C+
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
NEE
23% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
129% above
~9%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~27%/yr
-1%
1-yr DCF upside
-59%
+29%
5-yr DCF upside
-56%
+90%
10-yr DCF upside
-52%
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
NEE
Why this score
Raising its dividend
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.
NEENextEra Energy, Inc.
Utilities - Regulated Electric · $77.38 · beta 0.64
Why now
Utilities - Regulated Electric · market cap $161.4b. Down 22% from 52-week high of $98.75 — deep drawdown territory. 19 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $97.05 (implying +25% upside).
Moat
Net margin 31% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 15% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. $161.4b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
Risk
Mature compounder — the risk is paying up for quality at a moment when growth is decelerating. Watch for sequential revenue + margin trends; the inflection from "compounder" to "ex-compounder" is hard to spot until the multiple already started compressing.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
MWH leads NEE by 9.4 points (72.0 to 62.6), its sharpest advantage coming in Rev (grade A). A contrarian could still prefer NEE for its stronger P/E (grade B). All screen as growth-type names but sit in different sectors (Utilities - Renewable versus Utilities - Regulated Electric), so their grades are relative to different peer sets.
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 MWH and NEE diverge
On the headline score the gap is 13.7 points in favor of MWH. The widest single difference is Growth, where MWH leads by 29.1 points.
GrowthMWH 95.4 · NEE 66.3MWH +29.1
ValueMWH 74.9 · NEE 50.1MWH +24.8
QualityMWH 74.2 · NEE 59.8MWH +14.4
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 NEE the better stock?
MWH scores higher: MWH 72.0, NEE 58.3 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 NEE differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where MWH leads by 29 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. MWH leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are MWH and NEE 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.