Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. TGLS scored 50.1, EXP scored 49.0 — TGLS leads.
Compare another set
TGLS
Tecnoglass Holdings Inc.
Building Materials · Quality-Growth
50.1
$37.57 · $1.7B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
1.1
TGLS leads
EXP
Eagle Materials Inc.
Building Materials · Quality-Growth
49
$164.70 · $5.1B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Fastest growthTGLS+9.9%
Strongest balance sheetTGLS0.29
Highest qualityTGLS74 / 100
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
TGLS
stronger →← stronger
EXP
74
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
72
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
37
34
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
45
TGLS is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
TGLS
EXP
-$9mF
FCF
$171mC
+9.9%B
Rev
+1.7%C
0.29B
D/E
1.21C
1.6xB+
P/S
—
—
PEG
2.09C
—
P/E
13.0xB+
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
TGLS
EXP
—
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
163% above
—
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~28%/yr
—
1-yr DCF upside
-61%
—
5-yr DCF upside
-62%
—
10-yr DCF upside
-63%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
TGLS
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
Durable high returns
Cyclical growth
EXP
Why this score
Buying back stock
Durable high returns
The companies
TGLSTecnoglass Holdings Inc.
Building Materials · $37.57 · beta 1.42
Why now
Building Materials · market cap $1.7b. Down 42% from 52-week high of $65.33 — deep drawdown territory. 4 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $55.75 (implying +48% upside).
Moat
Net margin 12% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 16% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. Mining moat is reserve quality + extraction cost per unit — top-quartile cost producers generate cash through the commodity cycle while marginal producers burn it.
Risk
Free cash flow is negative (-$9m) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk. Down 42% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 1.42 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return.
EXPEagle Materials Inc.
Building Materials · $164.70 · beta 1.33
Why now
Building Materials · market cap $5.1b. Down 33% from 52-week high of $245.53 — deep drawdown territory. 10 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $201.50 (implying +22% upside).
Moat
Net margin 17% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 27% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. Mining moat is reserve quality + extraction cost per unit — top-quartile cost producers generate cash through the commodity cycle while marginal producers burn it.
Risk
Down 33% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Production-cost sensitivity — top-quartile cost producers generate cash through the cycle while marginal producers burn it; watch the cost-per-unit trend, not just headline revenue.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
TGLS leads EXP by 2.1 points (60.1 to 58.0), its sharpest advantage coming in PEG (grade A-). A contrarian could still prefer EXP for its stronger FCF (grade C). Note they play different roles — EXP screens as growth, TGLS screens as spec — so the model rewards different traits for each.
Our AI analyst is busy right now, so this verdict is drawn directly from the pillars, grades and DCF above.
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 TGLS and EXP diverge
On the headline score the gap is 1.1 points in favor of TGLS. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
GrowthTGLS 50.0 · EXP 36.8TGLS +13.2
ValueTGLS 34.1 · EXP 44.5EXP +10.4
QualityTGLS 73.8 · EXP 71.8level
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 TGLS or EXP the better stock?
TGLS scores higher: TGLS 50.1, EXP 49.0 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 TGLS and EXP differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where TGLS leads by 13 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 TGLS and EXP 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.