Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ZIM scored 58.7, FDX scored 59.9 — FDX leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. FDX's fundamentals are as of May 2026, but ZIM's are as of December 2025 — a 5-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
ZIM
ZIM Integrated Shipping Services Ltd.
Marine Shipping · Quality-Growth
58.7
$29.99 · $3.6B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
1.2
FDX leads
FDX
FedEx Corporation
Integrated Freight & Logistics · Quality-Growth
59.9
$291.71 · $69.0B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestFDX15.7x
Fastest growthFDX+7.7%
Strongest balance sheetFDX1.36
Highest qualityZIM69 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueZIM-84%
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)
ZIM
stronger →← stronger
FDX
69
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
56
44
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
56
67
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
69
FDX is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
ZIM
FDX
$2.1bB
FCF
$5.1bB+
-18.1%F
Rev
+7.7%B
1.37C
D/E
1.36C
26.3xB
P/E
15.7xA-
—
PEG
1.23B
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
ZIM
FDX
84% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
7% above
decline
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~7%/yr
+597%
1-yr DCF upside
-10%
+522%
5-yr DCF upside
-7%
+433%
10-yr DCF upside
-2%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
The companies
ZIMZIM Integrated Shipping Services Ltd.
Marine Shipping · $29.99 · beta 1.16
Why now
Marine Shipping · market cap $3.6b. 3% off the 52-week high of $30.96. Revenue -18% — in contraction; any catalyst that reverses this triggers re-rating. 4 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $27.80 (implying -7% upside).
Moat
ROE 12% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income.
Risk
Revenue contracting -18% — the operational turn is not yet visible in the top line.
Integrated Freight & Logistics · market cap $69.0b. 16% off the 52-week high of $345.37. 26 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $355.50 (implying +22% upside).
Moat
ROE 14% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 115% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash. $69.0b 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
Net margin 4.7% 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 ZIM and FDX diverge
On the headline score the gap is 1.2 points in favor of FDX. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
QualityZIM 69.0 · FDX 56.1ZIM +12.9
GrowthZIM 43.5 · FDX 55.7FDX +12.2
ValueZIM 67.4 · FDX 68.7level
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 FDX or ZIM the better stock?
FDX scores higher: FDX 59.9, ZIM 58.7 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 FDX and ZIM differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where ZIM 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 FDX and ZIM 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.