COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
MPC vs PARR
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. MPC scored 56.9, PARR scored 68.4 — PARR leads.
Compare another set
MPC
Marathon Petroleum Corporation
56.9
$360.72 · $101.3B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
11.5
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 growthMPC+15.0%
- Strongest balance sheetPARR0.56
- Highest qualityMPC79 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueMPC-60%
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)
MPC
stronger →← stronger
PARR
79
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
73
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
47
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
88
MPC and PARR split the three pillars evenly.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
MPC
PARR
$12.9bA-
FCF
$412mC
+15.0%B+
Rev
+13.2%B+
1.33C
D/E
0.56B
12.5xB+
P/E
4.6xA
1.79C+
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
MPC
PARR
60% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
34% below
~-21%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-11%/yr
+182%
1-yr DCF upside
+69%
+152%
5-yr DCF upside
+52%
+114%
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
MPC
Why this score
- Buying back stock
- Raising its dividend
- Durable high returns
- Cyclical growth
PARR
Why this score
- Cyclical growth
The companies
MPCMarathon Petroleum Corporation
Why now
Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing · market cap $101.3b. Trading near 52-week high of $367.60 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. Revenue growing +15%, comfortably above the S&P median. 18 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $324.56 (implying -10% upside).
Moat
ROE 45% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 151% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined. $101.3b 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
Trading within 2% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. Reserve-replacement treadmill — every barrel or ounce extracted has to be replaced through exploration or acquisition; underspending on replacement reserves shows up in production declines 2-3 years out.
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 MPC and PARR diverge
On the headline score the gap is 11.5 points in favor of PARR. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- ValueMPC 46.6 · PARR 88.0PARR +41.4
- QualityMPC 79.1 · PARR 72.9MPC +6.2
- GrowthMPC 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.