Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. RRC scored 66.0, TTE scored 55.5 — RRC leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. RRC's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but TTE'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.
RRC
Range Resources Corporation
Oil & Gas E&P · Quality-Growth
66
$40.89 · $9.6B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
10.5
RRC leads
TTE
TotalEnergies SE
Oil & Gas Integrated · Quality-Growth
55.5
$86.11 · $190.1B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestTTE10.8x
Fastest growthRRC+17.3%
Strongest balance sheetRRC0.22
Highest qualityRRC88 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueRRC-68%
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)
RRC
stronger →← stronger
TTE
88
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
82
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
43
65
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
49
RRC is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
RRC
TTE
$1.4bC+
FCF
$16.2bA-
+17.3%B+
Rev
-6.2%D
0.22A-
D/E
0.48B
11.3xB+
P/E
10.8xB+
0.86B+
PEG
0.65A-
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
RRC
TTE
68% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
6% below
~-19%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-2%/yr
+188%
1-yr DCF upside
+18%
+211%
5-yr DCF upside
+7%
+248%
10-yr DCF upside
-7%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
RRC
Why this score
Raising its dividend
Cyclical growth
TTE
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
Durable high returns
The companies
RRCRange Resources Corporation
Oil & Gas E&P · $40.89 · beta 0.71
Why now
Oil & Gas E&P · market cap $9.6b. 15% off the 52-week high of $48.31. Revenue growing +17%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.86 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 23 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $45.57 (implying +11% upside).
Moat
Net margin 26% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 18% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 158% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Hedge-book exposure — many commodity producers hedge forward production; if the hedge book is concentrated at prices well below spot, the upside the market expects is already locked away.
TTETotalEnergies SE
Oil & Gas Integrated · $86.11 · beta 0.09
Why now
Oil & Gas Integrated · market cap $190.1b. 9% off the 52-week high of $94.17. Revenue -6% — in contraction; any catalyst that reverses this triggers re-rating. PEG 0.65 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 10 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $98.55 (implying +14% upside).
Moat
ROE 11% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 121% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash. $190.1b 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
Revenue contracting -6% — the operational turn is not yet visible in the top line. 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 RRC and TTE diverge
On the headline score the gap is 10.5 points in favor of RRC. The widest single difference is Value, where RRC leads by 16.2 points.
ValueRRC 65.3 · TTE 49.1RRC +16.2
GrowthRRC 50.0 · TTE 42.6RRC +7.4
QualityRRC 88.1 · TTE 81.8RRC +6.3
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 RRC or TTE the better stock?
RRC scores higher: RRC 66.0, TTE 55.5 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 RRC and TTE differ most?
The widest gap is value, where RRC leads by 16 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. RRC leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are RRC and TTE 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.