COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
MWH vs VST
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. MWH scored 72.0, VST scored 73.8 — VST leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. VST's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but MWH's are as of March 2026 — a 3-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
MWH
SOLV Energy, Inc.
72
$28.92 · $5.9B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
1.8
VST leads
VST
Vistra Corp.
73.8
$138.94 · $46.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestVST23.4x
- Fastest growthMWH+34.8%
- Strongest balance sheetMWH0.10
- Highest qualityMWH75 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueMWH-32%
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)
MWH
stronger →← stronger
VST
75
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
65
95
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
88
87
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
70
MWH is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
MWH
VST
$368mC
FCF
$2.3bB
+34.8%A
Rev
+18.6%B+
0.10A
D/E
3.73D
49.0xD
P/E
23.4xC+
1.17B+
PEG
0.41A
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
MWH
VST
32% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
19% above
~5%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~20%/yr
+12%
1-yr DCF upside
-36%
+48%
5-yr DCF upside
-16%
+120%
10-yr DCF upside
+22%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
MWH
Why this score
- Short track record
VST
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
MWHSOLV Energy, Inc.
Why now
Utilities - Renewable · market cap $5.9b. Down 40% from 52-week high of $48.40 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +35% — in hypergrowth territory. 11 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $45.18 (implying +56% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income — non-cash charges (depreciation, intangible amortization) are holding down GAAP earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
Down 40% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Trailing P/E 49x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. Net margin 3.8% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
VSTVistra Corp.
Why now
Utilities - Independent Power Producers · market cap $46.6b. Down 37% from 52-week high of $219.82 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +19%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.41 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 18 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $219.72 (implying +58% upside).
Moat
ROE 40% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 102% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
D/E 3.73 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Down 37% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 1.43 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
VST leads MWH by 1.8 points (73.8 to 72.0), its sharpest advantage coming in P/E (grade C+). A contrarian could still prefer MWH, which trades about 34% below our DCF fair value — a margin of safety the score doesn't reward. Note they play different roles — MWH screens as growth, VST screens as value — 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 MWH and VST diverge
On the headline score the gap is 1.8 points in favor of VST. The widest single difference is Value, where MWH leads by 16.3 points.
- ValueMWH 86.5 · VST 70.2MWH +16.3
- QualityMWH 74.9 · VST 64.8MWH +10.1
- GrowthMWH 95.2 · VST 88.3MWH +6.9
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.