Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ACN scored 77.6, IBM scored 58.3 — ACN leads.
Compare another set
ACN
Accenture plc
Information Technology Services · Quality-Growth
77.6
$209.06 · $127.9B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
19.3
ACN leads
IBM
International Business Machines Corporation
Information Technology Services · Quality-Growth
58.3
$227.13 · $214.0B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestACN15.4x
Fastest growthIBM+7.6%
Strongest balance sheetACN0.40
Highest qualityACN88 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueACN-35%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
ACN
stronger →← stronger
IBM
88
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
70
70
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
60
76
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
47
ACN is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
ACN
IBM
$12.6bA-
FCF
$13.1bA-
+7.4%B
Rev
+7.6%B
0.40B
D/E
1.89D
15.4xA-
P/E
20.2xB+
1.98C+
PEG
2.14C
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
ACN
IBM
35% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
20% below
~-4%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~0%/yr
+42%
1-yr DCF upside
+20%
+53%
5-yr DCF upside
+25%
+70%
10-yr DCF upside
+32%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
ACN
Why this score
Raising its dividend
Durable high returns
IBM
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
ACNAccenture plc
Information Technology Services · $209.06 · beta 1.10
Why now
Information Technology Services · market cap $127.9b. Down 28% from 52-week high of $291.09 — deep drawdown territory. 24 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $223.65 (implying +7% upside).
Moat
ROE 26% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 150% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash. $127.9b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
Risk
Mature compounder — the risk is paying up for quality at a moment when growth is decelerating. Watch for sequential revenue + margin trends; the inflection from "compounder" to "ex-compounder" is hard to spot until the multiple already started compressing.
IBMInternational Business Machines Corporation
Information Technology Services · $227.13 · beta 0.72
Why now
Information Technology Services · market cap $214.0b. Down 32% from 52-week high of $332.46 — deep drawdown territory. 23 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $240.56 (implying +6% upside).
Moat
Net margin 16% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 34% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 123% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Down 32% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where ACN and IBM diverge
On the headline score the gap is 19.3 points in favor of ACN. The widest single difference is Value, where ACN leads by 28.7 points.
ValueACN 75.7 · IBM 47.0ACN +28.7
QualityACN 87.6 · IBM 70.2ACN +17.4
GrowthACN 70.5 · IBM 59.9ACN +10.6
Pillars run 0–100. Value is judged against each company's own sector, so a Value score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.
Common questions
Is ACN or IBM the better stock?
ACN scores higher: ACN 77.6, IBM 58.3 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
Where do ACN and IBM differ most?
The widest gap is value, where ACN leads by 29 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. ACN leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are ACN and IBM scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.