AP vs FLS

Ampco-Pittsburgh Corporation vs Flowserve Corporation — Valuation Comparison 2026

AP

Pumps & Pumping Equipment
Ampco-Pittsburgh Corporation
Quality
5.7
out of 10
Value Trap
26
LOW
Price
$11.32
Last close
Models
8/13
Active
VS

FLS

Pumps & Pumping Equipment
Flowserve Corporation
Quality
9.9
out of 10
Value Trap
6
SAFE
Price
$75.51
Last close
Models
13/13
Active

Model-by-Model Comparison

ModelType AP Fair ValueAP Upside FLS Fair ValueFLS Upside
Bayesian DCF Intrinsic $19.42 -74.3%
Earnings Power Value Intrinsic $12.55 -83.4%
EROIC Spread Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
First Chicago Scenario $3.72 -67.1% $66.07 -12.5%
Markov DDM Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
ML-RIV Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
Dynamic NAV Asset-Based $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
PWERM Option-Based $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
Regime Cross-Sectional Relative $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
Sentiment SOTP Hybrid $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
CUCE Ensemble Ensemble $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
FTNN Topology Relative $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
RCMH-DCF Intrinsic $4.76 -60.5% $52.98 -29.8%
🔒

Unlock Full 13-Model Comparison

Access all valuation models for AP vs FLS — including EROIC Spread, First Chicago, Markov DDM, PWERM, and 7 more.

Access Full Analysis — From $27/mo →

AP vs FLS — Which Stock Is More Undervalued?

FLS scores higher with a 9.9/10 quality rating vs AP's 5.7/10. Both stocks are analyzed daily using SEC EDGAR filings across 13 independent models.

Comparing Ampco-Pittsburgh Corporation (AP) and Flowserve Corporation (FLS) across 13 institutional-grade valuation models reveals how each company's intrinsic value stacks up against its market price. CirclFi's engine processes SEC EDGAR 10-K and 10-Q filings, FRED macroeconomic data, and GDELT news sentiment to generate independent fair value estimates daily.

AP currently trades at $11.32 with a QOC of 5.7/10, while FLS trades at $75.51 with a QOC of 9.9/10.

Both companies are analyzed with models spanning intrinsic (Bayesian DCF, EPV), scenario-based (First Chicago), regime-switching (Markov DDM, RCMH-DCF), machine learning (ML-RIV, FTNN Topology), and ensemble methods (CUCE).