Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. PAM scored 58.2, MMM scored 38.2 — PAM leads.
Compare another set
PAM
Pampa Energía S.A.
Conglomerates · Quality-Growth
58.2
$80.34 · $4.3B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
20.0
PAM leads
MMM
3M Company
Conglomerates · Quality-Growth
38.2
$159.96 · $82.5B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Fastest growthPAM+6.5%
Strongest balance sheetPAM0.65
Highest qualityMMM71 / 100
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
PAM
stronger →← stronger
MMM
49
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
71
70
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
43
58
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
18
PAM is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
PAM
MMM
-$455mF
FCF
$4.0bB
+6.5%C+
Rev
+2.3%C
0.65B
D/E
4.38D
1.8xB+
P/S
—
0.69A-
PEG
1.54C+
—
P/E
28.4xB
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
PAM
MMM
—
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
51% above
—
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~13%/yr
—
1-yr DCF upside
-32%
—
5-yr DCF upside
-34%
—
10-yr DCF upside
-35%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
PAM
No notable signals flagged.
MMM
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
The companies
PAMPampa Energía S.A.
Conglomerates · $80.34 · beta -0.24
Why now
Conglomerates · market cap $4.3b. 15% off the 52-week high of $94.50. PEG 0.69 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 11 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $121.09 (implying +51% 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 15% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately.
Risk
Free cash flow is negative (-$455m) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk.
MMM3M Company
Conglomerates · $159.96 · beta 1.06
Why now
Conglomerates · market cap $82.5b. 13% off the 52-week high of $184.90. 18 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $186.15 (implying +16% upside).
Moat
FCF converts 133% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash. $82.5b 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
D/E 4.38 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer.
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 PAM and MMM diverge
On the headline score the gap is 20.0 points in favor of PAM. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
ValuePAM 57.8 · MMM 18.4PAM +39.4
GrowthPAM 69.8 · MMM 42.7PAM +27.1
QualityPAM 48.9 · MMM 71.1MMM +22.2
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 PAM or MMM the better stock?
PAM scores higher: PAM 58.2, MMM 38.2 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 PAM and MMM differ most?
The widest gap is value, where PAM leads by 39 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 PAM and MMM 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.