Duke Energy holds the cleaner structural position, with the lead spread across growth and stability. Koninklijke Vopak still has the edge on profitability, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. In the market, Koninklijke Vopak carries the stronger setup — intact trend against Duke Energy's broken trend. That leaves a split case: the structural lead stays with Duke Energy, but the market is not currently confirming it.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels. Peer scores are normalised within each company's primary universe (DUK: Russell 1000, VPK.AS: STOXX 600).
The clearest separation starts in growth, but stability adds another real layer to the result. The overall score gap is 10 points in favour of Duke Energy Corporation.
This pair is matched through long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.
The pair sits on a clearly comparable long-term path, though it is not a near-twin match.
The match is driven mainly by capital structure and operating margin level.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
The largest gaps do not all point in the same direction.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
Duke Energy Corporation still looks stronger overall, though current pricing looks more supportive for Koninklijke Vopak N.V..
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
Where DUK and VPK.AS each sit in their own 5-year price and valuation history.
Describes historical entry positioning only. Descriptive — not investment advice.
Earnings growth is one contributing factor within the growth lead.
Capital efficiency also runs the other way, with a 6.6-point ROIC edge acting as a real counterforce.
The lead is built on both growth and stability — though profitability still provides a counterweight.
Break down the DUK vs VPK.AS comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how DUK and VPK.AS 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.
Because scores are peer-relative, the same company can have slightly different scores in different index universes. On comparison pages, both companies are shown within their shared peer universe wherever possible — so the scores are directly comparable. The peer basis is stated on each score card.
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.