Which is better, FANG or WES?

On the Buffett-Fit framework, Western Midstream Partners, LP (WES) currently grades higher than FANG — 68/100 (B grade) vs 57/100 (C). That said, "better" depends on which framework you trust — FANG wins on none; WES wins on Warren Buffett, Benjamin Graham, Philip Fisher, Peter Lynch, Joel Greenblatt, Charlie Munger, and Terry Smith. The full pillar breakdown is on this page.

Should I buy FANG or WES?

This page is an educational comparison, not investment advice. Both FANG and WES are graded against the same Buffett 5-pillar framework (moat, earnings durability, management quality, financial health, valuation) plus six other documented investor frameworks. Read the side-by-side breakdown to see which one matches the criteria you care about most — and always do your own research before making any investment decision.

Is FANG better than WES for value investing?

On the Buffett-style value-investing framework, WES currently grades higher — 68/100 vs 57/100, a 11-point gap. The gap is driven by which pillars each stock passes; the table on this page shows moat, durability, management, financial health, and valuation side-by-side.

What's the difference between FANG and WES on Warren Buffett's framework?

Both stocks are evaluated on the same five pillars: economic moat (durable competitive advantage), earnings durability (consistent profitability), management quality (capital allocation), financial health (conservative balance sheet), and valuation (margin of safety). FANG currently scores 57/100 (C grade); WES scores 68/100 (B grade). The "Where each wins" section on this page breaks down which pillar each stock dominates.

Which has the stronger moat, FANG or WES?

Moat strength is one of the five pillars in the Buffett-Fit score on this page. FANG and WES are each scored on ROIC sustainability, gross-margin durability, and qualitative signals like brand strength, switching costs, network effects, and regulatory barriers. The pillar breakdown on this page shows the moat sub-score side-by-side so you can see which one has the more durable competitive advantage.

Which is more undervalued, FANG or WES?

Valuation is one of the five Buffett-Fit pillars on this page. Both stocks are scored on owner-earnings yield, price-to-intrinsic-value vs the underlying compounding rate, and the margin of safety relative to a conservative DCF. The valuation sub-score in the table below tells you which one currently trades at a more attractive price relative to its underlying business quality.

Are FANG and WES both Energy stocks?

Yes — both Diamondback Energy, Inc. (FANG) and Western Midstream Partners, LP (WES) operate in the Energy sector. That makes this a direct sector-peer comparison, which is the apples-to-apples way to use the Buffett-Fit framework: the score weighs each stock against its sector's specific quality and valuation benchmarks (sector-relative bonus), so the cross-stock comparison isn't distorted by inter-sector base-rate differences.

Is this FANG vs WES comparison investment advice?

No. This page is an educational pattern-match against documented public frameworks (Buffett, Graham, Fisher, Lynch, Greenblatt, Munger, Smith), not personalised investment advice. The scores reflect how closely each stock matches each framework's documented criteria — they are not buy/hold/sell recommendations. Always do your own research and consult a licensed financial adviser for personalised advice.

Stock comparison

Diamondback Energy

Western Midstream Partners, LP

Scored across Buffett, Graham, Lynch and Greenblatt - plus a side-by-side metric table covering valuation, quality, growth and balance sheet.

FANG

Diamondback Energy

Market cap

$57.48B

Sector

Energy

WES

Western Midstream Partners, LP

Market cap

$18.31B

Sector

Energy

Overall winner

Western Midstream Partners, LP WES

Wins on the combined sum of fit scores across all four strategies. Per-strategy breakdown below.

Fit scores by strategy

Strategy	FANG	WES	Winner
Warren Buffett	57C	68B	WES
Benjamin Graham	53C	73B	WES
Philip Fisher	57C	62C	WES
Peter Lynch	27F	58C	WES
Joel Greenblatt	16F	41D	WES
Charlie Munger	47D	68D	WES
Terry Smith	40D	68D	WES

Side-by-side metrics

Metric	FANG	WES
Market cap	$57.48B	$18.31B
P/E (TTM)	140.5x	15.3x
EV/EBIT	14.2x	16.5x
ROIC (TTM)	5.09%	11.53%
Gross margin	41.83%	68.78%
Net margin	2.65%	29.7%
Revenue CAGR 5y	22.16%	7.51%
EPS CAGR 5y	-17.47%	8.4%
Debt / Equity	0.4x	2.6x
Dividend yield	2.07%	7.95%

Where each one wins

The metrics with the biggest gap between the two - sorted so the most decisive edges read first.

FANG leads on

Debt / Equity0.4xvs 2.6x+85%
Market cap$57.48Bvs $18.31B+68%
Revenue CAGR 5y22.16%vs 7.51%+66%
EV/EBIT14.2xvs 16.5x+14%

WES leads on

EPS CAGR 5y8.4%vs -17.47%+148%
Net margin29.7%vs 2.65%+91%
P/E (TTM)15.3xvs 140.5x+89%
Dividend yield7.95%vs 2.07%+74%

Educational tool. Fit scores are deterministic projections from public financials onto each investor's published criteria - not personal recommendations or advice.

Diamondback Energy

Western Midstream Partners, LP

Fit scores by strategy

Side-by-side metrics

Where each one wins

More like FANG

More like WES

Related on invest-like

Key terms in this analysis