The structural profiles are close, with Antero Resources carrying a narrow edge on profitability. Eurazeo SE still has the edge on valuation, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. Both sides have seen trend damage — neither carries a clear market edge right now. With both trends damaged, the structural comparison carries most of the weight here.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
The lead runs through profitability, while valuation still acts as a real counterweight on the other side.
This pair is matched through long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.
A moderate similarity means the pair is structurally comparable, but not a near-twin trajectory match.
The match is driven mainly by investment intensity and recent revenue growth.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
The clearest separation appears in profitability.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
The setup splits cleanly: structure favours Antero Resources Corporation, while the price setup favours Eurazeo SE.
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) and Forward P/E where available.
The profitability lead is mainly driven by a 63-point operating margin advantage.
Absolute pricing still looks more supportive for Eurazeo SE, with a forward P/E that is 6 turns lower there.
Profitability points more clearly to Antero Resources Corporation, but valuation and current pricing keep the broader result mixed.
Break down the AR vs RF.PA comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how AR and RF.PA each compare against other companies in their peer groups.
Rule-based, descriptive analysis only. Derived from peer percentile dimensions. Not investment advice. Peer groups are determined algorithmically based on structural similarity — not by sector classification alone.
AssetNext scores reflect each company's structural position within its functional peer group — not a ranking against all stocks simultaneously. Peers are identified by similarity across eight financial dimensions, including revenue growth trajectory, margin structure, capital intensity, and earnings stability. A score of 75 means the company ranks in the top quartile within its own peer group, not the entire market.
Four dimension scores drive the overall peer score: Growth (revenue trajectory and expansion dynamics), Quality (margin structure and capital efficiency), Valuation (peer-relative pricing on standard multiples), and Stability (earnings consistency and financial predictability). Each dimension is scored 0–100 relative to the peer group, then combined into an overall peer score using equal weighting.
Scores are recalculated periodically as underlying financial data is updated. All analysis is descriptive and rule-based — AssetNext describes structural realities and never issues buy, sell or hold recommendations.