Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. OC scored 26.0, EME scored 72.5 — EME leads.
Compare another set
OC
Owens Corning
Building Products & Equipment · Quality-Growth
26
$114.16 · $9.0B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
46.5
EME leads
EME
EMCOR Group, Inc.
Engineering & Construction · Quality-Growth
72.5
$789.45 · $34.8B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Fastest growthEME+16.6%
Strongest balance sheetEME0.13
Highest qualityEME84 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueOC-2%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
OC
stronger →← stronger
EME
42
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
84
15
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
88
28
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
52
EME is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
OC
EME
$897mC+
FCF
$1.2bC+
-7.2%D
Rev
+16.6%B+
1.50C
D/E
0.13A-
0.9xA-
P/S
—
1.51C+
PEG
0.32A
—
P/E
24.6xB
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
OC
EME
2% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
75% above
~0%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~24%/yr
+11%
1-yr DCF upside
-50%
+2%
5-yr DCF upside
-43%
-9%
10-yr DCF upside
-31%
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
OC
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
EME
Why this score
Durable high returns
The companies
OCOwens Corning
Building Products & Equipment · $114.16 · beta 1.32
Why now
Building Products & Equipment · market cap $9.0b. Down 29% from 52-week high of $159.91 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue -7% — in contraction; any catalyst that reverses this triggers re-rating. 16 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $157.44 (implying +38% upside).
Moat
Turnaround / out-of-favor name — GAAP-unprofitable for now, so the durability case is forward-looking: it rests on a recovery (margin normalization, a cyclical upturn or restructuring) or an un-monetized asset (IP / network effects / first-mover position) rather than on current reported results.
Risk
Revenue contracting -7% — the operational turn is not yet visible in the top line. Currently unprofitable (margin -6.8%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk. ROE -18% is below the long-run sustainable threshold of ~10% — capital efficiency would need to improve for the equity base to compound at the market rate.
EMEEMCOR Group, Inc.
Engineering & Construction · $789.45 · beta 1.12
Why now
Engineering & Construction · market cap $34.8b. 17% off the 52-week high of $951.96. Revenue growing +17%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.32 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 7 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $1,033 (implying +31% upside).
Moat
ROE 40% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which.
Risk
Value re-rating depends on a catalyst. Without one — analyst day, divestiture, margin recovery, capital return — the stock can stay cheap on these multiples for years.
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 OC and EME diverge
On the headline score the gap is 46.5 points in favor of EME. The widest single difference is Growth, where EME leads by 73.4 points.
GrowthOC 14.7 · EME 88.1EME +73.4
QualityOC 42.4 · EME 83.8EME +41.4
ValueOC 28.3 · EME 51.5EME +23.2
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 EME or OC the better stock?
EME scores higher: EME 72.5, OC 26.0 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 EME and OC differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where EME leads by 73 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. EME leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are EME and OC 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.