COMPARE · Data as of August 12, 2026
AVT vs SNX
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. AVT scored 38.2, SNX scored 64.0 — SNX leads.
Compare another set
AVT
Avnet, Inc.
38.2
$97.31 · $8.0B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
25.8
SNX leads
SNX
TD SYNNEX Corporation
64
$255.21 · $20.3B
fundamentals as of
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
AVT
stronger →← stronger
SNX
48
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
62
68
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
94
17
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
45
SNX is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
AVT
SNX
$33mC-
FCF
$375mC
+12.7%B+
Rev
+16.3%B+
0.69C+
D/E
0.53B
23.9xB+
P/E
18.2xA-
2.65C
PEG
0.90B+
Winner per row is the stronger grade in our model; a tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
AVT
SNX
1645% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
300% above
>60%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~47%/yr
-94%
1-yr DCF upside
-78%
-94%
5-yr DCF upside
-75%
-94%
10-yr DCF upside
-70%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
AVT
Why this score
- Buying back stock
- Raising its dividend
SNX
Why this score
- Buying back stock
- Raising its dividend
The companies
AVTAvnet, Inc.
Why now
Electronics & Computer Distribution · market cap $8.0b. Trading near 52-week high of $100.00 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. Revenue growing +13%, comfortably above the S&P median. 4 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $106.25 (implying +9% upside).
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
Trading within 3% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. Net margin 0.9% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first. ROE 4% is below the long-run sustainable threshold of ~10% — capital efficiency would need to improve for the equity base to compound at the market rate.
SNXTD SYNNEX Corporation
Why now
Electronics & Computer Distribution · market cap $20.3b. 14% off the 52-week high of $296.47. Revenue growing +16%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.90 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 11 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $333.55 (implying +31% upside).
Moat
ROE 13% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere.
Risk
Beta 1.44 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. Net margin 1.6% 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 AVT and SNX diverge
On the headline score the gap is 25.8 points in favour of SNX. The widest single difference is Value, where SNX leads by 28.1 points.
- ValueAVT 17.2 · SNX 45.3SNX +28.1
- GrowthAVT 67.8 · SNX 94.1SNX +26.3
- QualityAVT 47.9 · SNX 61.6SNX +13.7
Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a 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.