Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. SEB scored 58.2, PAM scored 58.2 — tied at the top.
Compare another set
SEB
Seaboard Corporation
Conglomerates · Quality-Growth
58.2
$3,976.00 · $3.8B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
0.0
Tied
PAM
Pampa Energía S.A.
Conglomerates · Quality-Growth
58.2
$80.34 · $4.3B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestSEB0.4x
Fastest growthSEB+8.2%
Strongest balance sheetSEB0.36
Highest qualityPAM49 / 100
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/S 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)
SEB
stronger →← stronger
PAM
46
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
49
60
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
70
71
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
58
PAM is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
SEB
PAM
-$23mF
FCF
-$455mF
+8.2%B
Rev
+6.5%C+
0.36B+
D/E
0.65B
0.4xA
P/S
1.8xB+
0.65A-
PEG
0.69A-
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.
Model signals
SEB
PAM
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
SEBSeaboard Corporation
Conglomerates · $3,976.00 · beta 0.21
Why now
Conglomerates · market cap $3.8b. Down 34% from 52-week high of $5989.37 — deep drawdown territory. PEG 0.65 — paying under fair value for the growth rate.
Moat
ROE 12% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere.
Risk
Free cash flow is negative (-$23m) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk. Down 34% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
PAMPampa Energía S.A.
Conglomerates · $80.34 · beta -0.24
Why now
Conglomerates · market cap $4.3b. 15% off the 52-week high of $94.50. PEG 0.69 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 11 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $121.09 (implying +51% upside).
Moat
Net margin 24% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 15% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately.
Risk
Free cash flow is negative (-$455m) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
The model slightly favors PAM with a 59.2 score over SEB's 58.3, primarily due to PAM's stronger Quality pillar at 55 versus SEB's 46. A contrarian, however, might prefer SEB for its superior Value pillar score of 72 and a much lower P/S of 0.4x. Both companies present a caution signal with their FCF metric graded 'F'.
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 SEB and PAM diverge
The two are effectively level on the headline score. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
ValueSEB 71.3 · PAM 57.8SEB +13.5
GrowthSEB 59.7 · PAM 69.8PAM +10.1
QualitySEB 46.3 · PAM 48.9level
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 SEB or PAM the better stock?
On the Bull Rankings quality-growth score they are level: SEB and PAM both score 58.2 out of 100. The score blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number, so a tie means the model sees no meaningful edge either way — the pillar breakdown on this page shows where each is actually stronger.
Where do SEB and PAM differ most?
The widest gap is value, where SEB leads by 14 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. Neither name sweeps: they trade the lead across the three pillars, so the comparison is a trade-off rather than one being better on every measure.
How are SEB and PAM 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.