Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. VLO scored 55.4, PSX scored 47.8 — VLO leads.
Compare another set
VLO
Valero Energy Corporation
Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing · Quality-Growth
55.4
$433.75 · $124.9B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
7.6
VLO leads
PSX
Phillips 66
Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing · Quality-Growth
47.8
$278.18 · $111.5B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestPSX15.9x
Fastest growthPSX+14.4%
Strongest balance sheetVLO0.40
Highest qualityVLO81 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueVLO-47%
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)
VLO
stronger →← stronger
PSX
81
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
47
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
42
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
46
VLO and PSX split the three pillars evenly.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
VLO
PSX
$8.9bB+
FCF
$6.4bB+
+12.6%B+
Rev
+14.4%B+
0.40B+
D/E
0.63B
18.1xB
P/E
15.9xB
2.19C
PEG
0.90B+
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
VLO
PSX
47% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
29% below
~-6%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~1%/yr
+68%
1-yr DCF upside
+23%
+89%
5-yr DCF upside
+41%
+126%
10-yr DCF upside
+73%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing · market cap $124.9b. 4% off the 52-week high of $449.77. Revenue growing +13%, comfortably above the S&P median. 19 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $388.74 (implying -10% upside).
Moat
ROE 29% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 123% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash. $124.9b 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
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.
Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing · market cap $111.5b. Trading near 52-week high of $286.57 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. Revenue growing +14%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.90 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 19 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $263.11 (implying -5% upside).
Moat
ROE 23% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. $111.5b 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
Trading within 3% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. Net margin 4.7% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first. Commodity exposure — earnings power tracks the price of the underlying commodity, not management execution. A 15-20% move in the commodity reprices the equity well before fundamentals catch up.
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 VLO and PSX diverge
On the headline score the gap is 7.6 points in favor of VLO. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
QualityVLO 80.5 · PSX 47.2VLO +33.3
ValueVLO 42.3 · PSX 46.2PSX +3.9
GrowthVLO 50.0 · PSX 50.0level
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 VLO or PSX the better stock?
VLO scores higher: VLO 55.4, PSX 47.8 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 VLO and PSX differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where VLO leads by 33 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 VLO and PSX 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.