Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. NJR scored 65.0, MWH scored 72.0 — MWH leads.
Compare another set
NJR
New Jersey Resources Corporation
Utilities - Regulated Gas · Quality-Growth
65
$51.21 · $5.2B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
7.0
MWH leads
MWH
SOLV Energy, Inc.
Utilities - Renewable · Quality-Growth
72
$26.21 · $5.3B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestNJR14.2x
Fastest growthMWH+34.8%
Strongest balance sheetMWH0.10
Highest qualityNJR76 / 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)
NJR
stronger →← stronger
MWH
76
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
74
56
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
95
64
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
75
MWH is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
NJR
MWH
$359mC
FCF
$295mC
+7.0%C+
Rev
+34.8%A
1.47B
D/E
0.10A
14.2xA-
P/E
55.8xD
2.14C
PEG
1.65C+
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
NJR
MWH
9% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
23% below
~3%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~9%/yr
+6%
1-yr DCF upside
-1%
+10%
5-yr DCF upside
+29%
+17%
10-yr DCF upside
+90%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
NJR
Why this score
Raising its dividend
MWH
Why this score
Short track record
The companies
NJRNew Jersey Resources Corporation
Utilities - Regulated Gas · $51.21 · beta 0.50
Why now
Utilities - Regulated Gas · market cap $5.2b. 16% off the 52-week high of $60.86. 7 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $59.86 (implying +17% upside).
Moat
Net margin 24% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 14% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 98% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Commodity exposure — earnings power tracks the price of the underlying commodity, not management execution. A 15-20% move in the commodity reprices the equity well before fundamentals catch up.
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.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
MWH leads NJR by 10.7 points (72.0 to 61.3), its sharpest advantage coming in Rev (grade A). A contrarian could still prefer NJR, which trades about 45% below our DCF fair value — a margin of safety the score doesn't reward. Note they play different roles — MWH screens as growth, NJR screens as value — so the model rewards different traits for each.
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 NJR and MWH diverge
On the headline score the gap is 7.0 points in favor of MWH. The widest single difference is Growth, where MWH leads by 39.3 points.
GrowthNJR 56.1 · MWH 95.4MWH +39.3
ValueNJR 64.2 · MWH 74.9MWH +10.7
QualityNJR 76.4 · MWH 74.2level
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 NJR the better stock?
MWH scores higher: MWH 72.0, NJR 65.0 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 NJR differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where MWH leads by 39 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. MWH also leads value, while quality is effectively level between them.
How are MWH and NJR 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.