VIST vs WDS

Vista Energy S.A.B. de C.V. vs Woodside Energy Group Limited — Valuation Comparison 2026

VIST

Crude Petroleum & Natural Gas
Vista Energy S.A.B. de C.V.
Quality
2.0
out of 10
Value Trap
Price
$74.20
Last close
Models
12/13
Active
VS

WDS

Crude Petroleum & Natural Gas
Woodside Energy Group Limited
Quality
8.3
out of 10
Value Trap
11
SAFE
Price
$21.83
Last close
Models
13/13
Active

Model-by-Model Comparison

ModelType VIST Fair ValueVIST Upside WDS Fair ValueWDS Upside
Bayesian DCF Intrinsic $34.67 -53.3% $53.75 +146.2%
Earnings Power Value Intrinsic $40.86 -44.2% $14.08 -35.5%
EROIC Spread Intrinsic $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
First Chicago Scenario $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
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 $•••.•• ••.•% $•••.•• ••.•%
🔒

Unlock Full 13-Model Comparison

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

Access Full Analysis — From $27/mo →

VIST vs WDS — Which Stock Is More Undervalued?

WDS scores higher with a 8.3/10 quality rating vs VIST's 2.0/10. Both stocks are analyzed daily using SEC EDGAR filings across 13 independent models.

Comparing Vista Energy S.A.B. de C.V. (VIST) and Woodside Energy Group Limited (WDS) 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.

VIST currently trades at $74.20 with a QOC of 2.0/10, while WDS trades at $21.83 with a QOC of 8.3/10.

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).