Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. PSX scored 47.8, MPC scored 59.0 — MPC leads.
Compare another set
PSX
Phillips 66
Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing · Quality-Growth
47.8
$278.18 · $111.5B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
11.2
MPC leads
MPC
Marathon Petroleum Corporation
Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing · Quality-Growth
59
$455.03 · $127.8B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestPSX15.9x
Fastest growthMPC+15.0%
Strongest balance sheetPSX0.63
Highest qualityMPC80 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueMPC-66%
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)
PSX
stronger →← stronger
MPC
47
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
80
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
46
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
52
MPC is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
PSX
MPC
$6.4bB+
FCF
$12.9bA-
+14.4%B+
Rev
+15.0%B+
0.63B
D/E
1.33C
15.9xB
P/E
16.0xB
0.90B+
PEG
1.07B+
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
PSX
MPC
29% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
66% below
~1%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-15%/yr
+23%
1-yr DCF upside
+156%
+41%
5-yr DCF upside
+192%
+73%
10-yr DCF upside
+257%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing · market cap $111.5b. Trading near 52-week high of $286.57 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. Revenue growing +14%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.90 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 19 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $263.11 (implying -5% upside).
Moat
ROE 23% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. $111.5b 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
Trading within 3% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. Net margin 4.7% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first. Commodity exposure — earnings power tracks the price of the underlying commodity, not management execution. A 15-20% move in the commodity reprices the equity well before fundamentals catch up.
Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing · market cap $127.8b. 3% off the 52-week high of $470.00. Revenue growing +15%, comfortably above the S&P median. 18 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $400.00 (implying -12% 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. $127.8b 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
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.
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 PSX and MPC diverge
On the headline score the gap is 11.2 points in favor of MPC. The widest single difference is Quality, where MPC leads by 32.4 points.
QualityPSX 47.2 · MPC 79.6MPC +32.4
ValuePSX 46.2 · MPC 51.5MPC +5.3
GrowthPSX 50.0 · MPC 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 MPC or PSX the better stock?
MPC scores higher: MPC 59.0, PSX 47.8 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 MPC and PSX differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where MPC leads by 32 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. MPC also leads value, while growth is effectively level between them.
How are MPC and PSX 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.