Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. SKY scored 50.9, LEN-B scored 34.1 — SKY leads.
Compare another set
SKY
Champion Homes, Inc.
Residential Construction · Quality-Growth
50.9
$79.63 · $4.3B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
16.8
SKY leads
LEN-B
Lennar Corporation
Residential Construction · Quality-Growth
34.1
$76.02 · $18.1B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestLEN-B14.4x
Fastest growthSKY+4.5%
Strongest balance sheetSKY0.08
Highest qualitySKY74 / 100
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)
SKY
stronger →← stronger
LEN-B
74
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
57
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
15
36
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
47
SKY is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
SKY
LEN-B
$266mC
FCF
$811mC+
+4.5%C+
Rev
-8.0%D
0.08A
D/E
0.28A-
23.2xC+
P/E
14.4xB+
4.43D
PEG
11.11D
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
SKY
LEN-B
7% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
110% above
~6%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~21%/yr
-9%
1-yr DCF upside
-50%
-7%
5-yr DCF upside
-52%
-4%
10-yr DCF upside
-55%
These two disagree on this pair: the Value pillar ranks cheapness against sector peers, while price-vs-fair-value is an absolute read. A name can be the better value in its sector and still the dearer one on cash flows.
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
SKY
Why this score
Buying back stock
Cyclical growth
LEN-B
Why this score
Buying back stock
The companies
SKYChampion Homes, Inc.
Residential Construction · $79.63 · beta 1.02
Why now
Residential Construction · market cap $4.3b. 20% off the 52-week high of $99.17. 6 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $103.50 (implying +30% upside).
Moat
ROE 12% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 139% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Mature compounder — the risk is paying up for quality at a moment when growth is decelerating. Watch for sequential revenue + margin trends; the inflection from "compounder" to "ex-compounder" is hard to spot until the multiple already started compressing.
LEN-BLennar Corporation
Residential Construction · $76.02 · beta 1.38
Why now
Residential Construction · market cap $18.1b. Down 39% from 52-week high of $125.48 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue -8% — in contraction; any catalyst that reverses this triggers re-rating.
Moat
Moat signals from the quantitative card are modest — profitability and capital efficiency are middle-of-pack. The thesis here depends on softer factors (switching costs, brand, distribution, regulatory protection) not captured by the quality-growth screen.
Risk
Revenue contracting -8% — the operational turn is not yet visible in the top line. Down 39% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Net margin 4.1% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
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 SKY and LEN-B diverge
On the headline score the gap is 16.8 points in favor of SKY. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
GrowthSKY 50.0 · LEN-B 14.7SKY +35.3
QualitySKY 73.7 · LEN-B 56.7SKY +17.0
ValueSKY 35.8 · LEN-B 47.4LEN-B +11.6
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 SKY or LEN-B the better stock?
SKY scores higher: SKY 50.9, LEN-B 34.1 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 SKY and LEN-B differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where SKY leads by 35 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 SKY and LEN-B 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.