Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. NXST scored 55.5, NYT scored 70.4 — NYT leads.
Compare another set
NXST
Nexstar Media Group, Inc.
Broadcasting · Quality-Growth
55.5
$161.45 · $5.0B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
14.9
NYT leads
NYT
The New York Times Company
Publishing · Quality-Growth
70.4
$66.32 · $10.7B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestNYT27.6x
Fastest growthNXST+10.5%
Strongest balance sheetNYT0.00
Highest qualityNYT85 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueNXST-56%
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)
NXST
stronger →← stronger
NYT
56
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
85
71
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
74
43
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
55
NYT is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
NXST
NYT
$743mC+
FCF
$623mC+
+10.5%B
Rev
+9.2%B
5.34D
D/E
0.00A
30.6xC+
P/E
27.6xC+
0.27A
PEG
3.79D
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
NXST
NYT
56% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
4% below
~-16%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~6%/yr
+131%
1-yr DCF upside
-3%
+125%
5-yr DCF upside
+4%
+118%
10-yr DCF upside
+16%
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
NXST
No notable signals flagged.
NYT
Why this score
Raising its dividend
The companies
NXSTNexstar Media Group, Inc.
Broadcasting · $161.45 · beta 0.93
Why now
Broadcasting · market cap $5.0b. Down 37% from 52-week high of $254.30 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +11%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.27 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 8 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $246.75 (implying +53% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income, mostly because of depreciation and amortization ($820m) — non-cash charges that hold down reported earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
D/E 5.34 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Down 37% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Dividend payout 141% of earnings on a 4.6% yield — distribution coverage is thin; one earnings stumble could force a dividend cut.
NYTThe New York Times Company
Publishing · $66.32 · beta 0.92
Why now
Publishing · market cap $10.7b. Down 24% from 52-week high of $87.10 — deep drawdown territory. 9 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $76.89 (implying +16% upside).
Moat
Net margin 13% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 20% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 159% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
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
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 NXST and NYT diverge
On the headline score the gap is 14.9 points in favor of NYT. The widest single difference is Quality, where NYT leads by 29.1 points.
QualityNXST 56.4 · NYT 85.5NYT +29.1
ValueNXST 42.7 · NYT 55.1NYT +12.4
GrowthNXST 71.2 · NYT 74.2NYT +3.0
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 NYT or NXST the better stock?
NYT scores higher: NYT 70.4, NXST 55.5 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 NYT and NXST differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where NYT leads by 29 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. NYT leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are NYT and NXST 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.