Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ADBE scored 85.4, SRAD scored 47.2 — ADBE leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. ADBE's fundamentals are as of August 2026, but SRAD's are as of December 2025 — a 8-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
ADBE
Adobe Inc.
Software - Application · Quality-Growth
85.4
$242.27 · $94.3B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
38.2
ADBE leads
SRAD
Sportradar Group AG
Software - Application · Quality-Growth
47.2
$12.49 · $3.7B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Fastest growthSRAD+16.6%
Strongest balance sheetSRAD0.08
Highest qualityADBE92 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueADBE-35%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
ADBE
stronger →← stronger
SRAD
92
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
73
80
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
73
85
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
23
ADBE is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
ADBE
SRAD
$10.6bA-
FCF
$217mC
+10.5%B
Rev
+16.6%B+
0.58C+
D/E
0.08B+
13.5xA-
P/E
—
0.58A-
PEG
—
—
P/S
2.4xA-
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
SRAD
35% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
28% above
~-2%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~18%/yr
+37%
1-yr DCF upside
-33%
+53%
5-yr DCF upside
-22%
+80%
10-yr DCF upside
-3%
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
SRAD
Why this score
Foreign reporter (EUR)
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.
SRADSportradar Group AG
Software - Application · $12.49 · beta 1.59
Why now
Software - Application · market cap $3.7b. Down 55% from 52-week high of $27.85 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +17%, comfortably above the S&P median. 22 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $18.09 (implying +45% upside).
Moat
ROE 10% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income, mostly because of depreciation and amortization ($434m) — non-cash charges that hold down reported earnings while cash generation stays strong. 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
Down 55% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 1.59 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.
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 ADBE and SRAD diverge
On the headline score the gap is 38.2 points in favor of ADBE. The widest single difference is Value, where ADBE leads by 61.8 points.
ValueADBE 84.8 · SRAD 23.0ADBE +61.8
QualityADBE 92.1 · SRAD 73.1ADBE +19.0
GrowthADBE 79.7 · SRAD 73.1ADBE +6.6
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 ADBE or SRAD the better stock?
ADBE scores higher: ADBE 85.4, SRAD 47.2 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 SRAD differ most?
The widest gap is value, where ADBE leads by 62 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. ADBE leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are ADBE and SRAD 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.