Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. QS scored 10.4, ALV scored 63.2 — ALV leads.
Compare another set
QS
QuantumScape Corporation
Auto Parts · Quality-Growth
10.4
$4.58 · $2.8B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
52.8
ALV leads
ALV
Autoliv, Inc.
Auto Parts · Quality-Growth
63.2
$109.76 · $8.0B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Strongest balance sheetQS0.06
Highest qualityALV81 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueALV-14%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
QS
stronger →← stronger
ALV
22
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
81
10
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
5
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
63
ALV is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
QS
ALV
-$273mF
FCF
$757mC+
—
Rev
+5.9%C+
0.06A
D/E
0.88B
—
PEG
0.85B+
—
P/E
12.9xA-
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
QS
ALV
—
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
14% below
—
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~2%/yr
—
1-yr DCF upside
+10%
—
5-yr DCF upside
+16%
—
10-yr DCF upside
+24%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
QS
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
ALV
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
Durable high returns
Cyclical growth
The companies
QSQuantumScape Corporation
Auto Parts · $4.58 · beta 2.84
Why now
Auto Parts · market cap $2.8b. Down 76% from 52-week high of $19.07 — deep drawdown territory. 8 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $6.66 (implying +45% upside).
Moat
Higher-variance name — the moat signals on the quantitative card are modest, so the durability case rests on execution (turning current growth into durable earnings power) or an un-monetized asset (IP / network effects / first-mover position) rather than an entrenched competitive position.
Risk
Free cash flow is negative (-$273m) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk. Down 76% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 2.84 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return.
ALVAutoliv, Inc.
Auto Parts · $109.76 · beta 1.40
Why now
Auto Parts · market cap $8.0b. 17% off the 52-week high of $132.17. PEG 0.85 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 16 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $134.31 (implying +22% upside).
Moat
ROE 26% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 118% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Value re-rating depends on a catalyst. Without one — analyst day, divestiture, margin recovery, capital return — the stock can stay cheap on these multiples 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 QS and ALV diverge
On the headline score the gap is 52.8 points in favor of ALV. The widest single difference is Quality, where ALV leads by 58.9 points.
QualityQS 21.7 · ALV 80.6ALV +58.9
ValueQS 5.2 · ALV 62.6ALV +57.4
GrowthQS 10.0 · ALV 50.0ALV +40.0
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 ALV or QS the better stock?
ALV scores higher: ALV 63.2, QS 10.4 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 ALV and QS differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where ALV leads by 59 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. ALV leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are ALV and QS 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.