Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ADBE scored 85.4, GDDY scored 78.6 — ADBE leads.
Compare another set
ADBE
Adobe Inc.
Software - Application · Quality-Growth
85.4
$242.27 · $94.3B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
6.8
ADBE leads
GDDY
GoDaddy Inc.
Software - Infrastructure · Quality-Growth
78.6
$104.35 · $13.2B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestADBE13.5x
Fastest growthADBE+10.5%
Highest qualityADBE92 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueGDDY-55%
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)
ADBE
stronger →← stronger
GDDY
92
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
91
80
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
73
85
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
73
ADBE is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
ADBE
GDDY
$10.6bA-
FCF
$1.7bC+
+10.5%B
Rev
+7.4%B
0.58C+
D/E
—
13.5xA-
P/E
15.5xA-
0.58A-
PEG
0.56A-
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
ADBE
GDDY
35% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
55% below
~-2%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-13%/yr
+37%
1-yr DCF upside
+109%
+53%
5-yr DCF upside
+122%
+80%
10-yr DCF upside
+142%
These two disagree on this pair: the Value pillar ranks cheapness against sector peers, while price-vs-fair-value is an absolute read. A name can be the better value in its sector and still the dearer one on cash flows.
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
ADBE
Why this score
Buying back stock
Durable high returns
GDDY
Why this score
Buying back stock
The companies
ADBEAdobe Inc.
Software - Application · $242.27 · beta 1.42
Why now
Software - Application · market cap $94.3b. Down 33% from 52-week high of $363.70 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +11%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.58 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 32 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $275.06 (implying +14% upside).
Moat
Net margin 28% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 62% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 145% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Down 33% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 1.42 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. Software — competitive moat is durable until it isn't; watch net revenue retention, gross margin trends, and any new market entrant with a fundamentally lower price point.
GDDYGoDaddy Inc.
Software - Infrastructure · $104.35 · beta 0.94
Why now
Software - Infrastructure · market cap $13.2b. Down 24% from 52-week high of $137.93 — deep drawdown territory. PEG 0.56 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 16 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $106.75 (implying +2% upside).
Moat
Net margin 18% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. FCF converts 187% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash. Software economics — recurring revenue, embedded customer workflows, and high gross margin all compound the moat once a base account is won. Switching costs are the lever.
Risk
Software — competitive moat is durable until it isn't; watch net revenue retention, gross margin trends, and any new market entrant with a fundamentally lower price point.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
The model favors ADBE (88.8) over GDDY (85.1), driven by ADBE's stronger A- grade for FCF compared to GDDY's C+. However, a contrarian might prefer GDDY, which trades 69% below its DCF fair value and implies a -18% annual growth rate, signaling significantly less market optimism than ADBE's 0% implied growth.
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 ADBE and GDDY diverge
On the headline score the gap is 6.8 points in favor of ADBE. The widest single difference is Value, where ADBE leads by 11.6 points.
ValueADBE 84.8 · GDDY 73.2ADBE +11.6
GrowthADBE 79.7 · GDDY 72.6ADBE +7.1
QualityADBE 92.1 · GDDY 91.4level
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 ADBE or GDDY the better stock?
ADBE scores higher: ADBE 85.4, GDDY 78.6 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 ADBE and GDDY differ most?
The widest gap is value, where ADBE leads by 12 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. ADBE also leads growth, while quality is effectively level between them.
How are ADBE and GDDY 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.