COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
CVI vs PARR
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. CVI scored 57.9, PARR scored 68.4 — PARR leads.
Compare another set
CVI
CVR Energy, Inc.
57.9
$39.63 · $4.0B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
10.5
PARR leads
PARR
Par Pacific Holdings, Inc.
68.4
$79.03 · $4.0B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestPARR4.6x
- Fastest growthCVI+17.9%
- Strongest balance sheetPARR0.56
- Highest qualityPARR73 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueCVI-59%
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)
CVI
stronger →← stronger
PARR
61
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
73
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
64
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
88
PARR is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
CVI
PARR
$351mC
FCF
$412mC
+17.9%B+
Rev
+13.2%B+
2.42D
D/E
0.56B
57.4xC
P/E
4.6xA
0.71A-
PEG
—
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
CVI
PARR
59% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
34% below
~-7%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-11%/yr
+83%
1-yr DCF upside
+69%
+142%
5-yr DCF upside
+52%
+266%
10-yr DCF upside
+30%
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
CVI
Why this score
- Cut its dividend
- Cyclical growth
PARR
Why this score
- Cyclical growth
The companies
CVICVR Energy, Inc.
Why now
Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing · market cap $4.0b. 5% off the 52-week high of $41.67. Revenue growing +18%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.71 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 5 sell-side analysts rate this an Underperform with a mean 1-yr target of $31.40 (implying -21% upside).
Moat
ROE 13% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income — non-cash charges (depreciation, intangible amortization) are holding down GAAP earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
D/E 2.42 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Trailing P/E 57.4x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Net margin 0.8% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
PARRPar Pacific Holdings, Inc.
Why now
Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing · market cap $4.0b. 9% off the 52-week high of $87.03. Revenue growing +13%, comfortably above the S&P median. 7 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $83.00 (implying +5% upside).
Moat
ROE 43% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which.
Risk
Jurisdictional + permitting risk — mining and extraction operations concentrate exposure to political stability, royalty regimes, and environmental review timelines that can stall production 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 CVI and PARR diverge
On the headline score the gap is 10.5 points in favor of PARR. The widest single difference is Value, where PARR leads by 24.3 points.
- ValueCVI 63.7 · PARR 88.0PARR +24.3
- QualityCVI 60.8 · PARR 72.9PARR +12.1
- GrowthCVI 50.0 · PARR 50.0level
Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a 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.