Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. PBA scored 40.2, LNG scored 58.8 — LNG leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. LNG's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but PBA's are as of December 2025 — a 6-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
PBA
Pembina Pipeline Corporation
Oil & Gas Midstream · Quality-Growth
40.2
$47.31 · $27.5B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
18.6
LNG leads
LNG
Cheniere Energy, Inc.
Oil & Gas Midstream · Quality-Growth
58.8
$278.18 · $57.5B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestLNG21.0x
Fastest growthLNG+27.2%
Strongest balance sheetPBA0.81
Highest qualityLNG82 / 100
Largest discount to fair valuePBA-1%
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)
PBA
stronger →← stronger
LNG
68
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
82
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
22
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
50
LNG is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
PBA
LNG
$1.5bC+
FCF
$2.8bB
+5.3%C+
Rev
+27.2%A-
0.81C+
D/E
2.43D
23.1xC+
P/E
21.0xC+
1.70C+
PEG
9.46D
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
PBA
LNG
1% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
6% above
~4%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~12%/yr
-1%
1-yr DCF upside
-19%
+1%
5-yr DCF upside
-5%
+3%
10-yr DCF upside
+19%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
PBA
Why this score
Raising its dividend
Cyclical growth
Foreign reporter (CAD)
LNG
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
Durable high returns
Cyclical growth
The companies
PBAPembina Pipeline Corporation
Oil & Gas Midstream · $47.31 · beta 0.75
Why now
Oil & Gas Midstream · market cap $27.5b. 8% off the 52-week high of $51.58.
Moat
Net margin 22% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 10% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 126% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Dividend payout 101% of earnings on a 4.4% yield — distribution coverage is thin; one earnings stumble could force a dividend cut. Jurisdictional + permitting risk — mining and extraction operations concentrate exposure to political stability, royalty regimes, and environmental review timelines that can stall production for years.
LNGCheniere Energy, Inc.
Oil & Gas Midstream · $278.18 · beta 0.06
Why now
Oil & Gas Midstream · market cap $57.5b. 8% off the 52-week high of $300.89. Revenue growing +27% — in hypergrowth territory. 21 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $310.57 (implying +12% upside).
Moat
Net margin 14% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 39% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 96% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
D/E 2.43 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. 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 PBA and LNG diverge
On the headline score the gap is 18.6 points in favor of LNG. The widest single difference is Value, where LNG leads by 27.4 points.
ValuePBA 22.2 · LNG 49.6LNG +27.4
QualityPBA 68.4 · LNG 81.8LNG +13.4
GrowthPBA 50.0 · LNG 50.0level
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 LNG or PBA the better stock?
LNG scores higher: LNG 58.8, PBA 40.2 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 LNG and PBA differ most?
The widest gap is value, where LNG leads by 27 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. LNG also leads quality, while growth is effectively level between them.
How are LNG and PBA 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.