Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. WDFC scored 57.0, SHW scored 53.1 — WDFC leads.
Compare another set
WDFC
WD-40 Company
Specialty Chemicals · Quality-Growth
57
$202.29 · $2.7B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
3.9
WDFC leads
SHW
The Sherwin-Williams Company
Specialty Chemicals · Quality-Growth
53.1
$319.36 · $77.5B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestSHW29.4x
Fastest growthWDFC+10.2%
Strongest balance sheetWDFC0.41
Highest qualityWDFC84 / 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)
WDFC
stronger →← stronger
SHW
84
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
78
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
44
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
38
WDFC is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
WDFC
SHW
$79mC-
FCF
$3.2bB
+10.2%B
Rev
+5.8%C+
0.41B
D/E
3.90D
30.7xC
P/E
29.4xC+
3.76D
PEG
2.07C
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
WDFC
SHW
106% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
66% above
~25%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~18%/yr
-55%
1-yr DCF upside
-41%
-52%
5-yr DCF upside
-40%
-47%
10-yr DCF upside
-37%
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
WDFC
Why this score
Raising its dividend
Durable high returns
Cyclical growth
SHW
Why this score
Buying back stock
Durable high returns
Cyclical growth
The companies
WDFCWD-40 Company
Specialty Chemicals · $202.29 · beta 0.26
Why now
Specialty Chemicals · market cap $2.7b. Down 32% from 52-week high of $298.90 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +10%, comfortably above the S&P median. 3 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $271.67 (implying +34% upside).
Moat
Net margin 13% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 32% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which.
Risk
Down 32% 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 31x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
SHWThe Sherwin-Williams Company
Specialty Chemicals · $319.36 · beta 1.08
Why now
Specialty Chemicals · market cap $77.5b. 15% off the 52-week high of $377.77. 23 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $385.87 (implying +21% upside).
Moat
ROE 70% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 120% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash. $77.5b 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
D/E 3.90 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer.
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 WDFC and SHW diverge
On the headline score the gap is 3.9 points in favor of WDFC. The widest single difference is Value, where WDFC leads by 6.0 points.
ValueWDFC 44.1 · SHW 38.1WDFC +6.0
QualityWDFC 84.2 · SHW 78.4WDFC +5.8
GrowthWDFC 50.0 · SHW 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 WDFC or SHW the better stock?
WDFC scores higher: WDFC 57.0, SHW 53.1 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 WDFC and SHW differ most?
The widest gap is value, where WDFC leads by 6 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. WDFC also leads quality, while growth is effectively level between them.
How are WDFC and SHW 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.