COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026

ADSK vs CRWV

Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ADSK scored 82.2, CRWV scored 18.6 — ADSK leads.
Compare another set
ADSK
Autodesk, Inc.
Software - Application · Quality-Growth
82.2
$253.82 · $53.6B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
63.6
ADSK leads
CRWV
CoreWeave, Inc.
Software - Infrastructure · Quality-Growth
18.6
$84.56 · $46.6B
fundamentals as of
  • Fastest growthCRWV+115.3%
  • Highest qualityADSK88 / 100
THE BULL RANKINGS SCORECARD82.2/ 100 · BULL SCOREPEER MEDIANQUALITY87.9GROWTH85.9VALUE73.4
THE BULL RANKINGS SCORECARD18.6/ 100 · BULL SCOREPEER MEDIANQUALITY12.9GROWTH100.0VALUE0.0
ADSKCRWVQuality87.912.9Growth85.9100.0Value73.40.0
FCFADSK$2.7bCRWV-$13.7b
RevADSK+18.3%CRWV+115.3%
ADSK
stronger →← stronger
CRWV
88
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
13
86
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
100
73
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
0
ADSK is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
ADSK
CRWV
$2.7bB
FCF
-$13.7bF
+18.3%B+
Rev
+115.3%A
0.85C+
D/E
37.1xB
P/E
0.96B+
PEG
P/S
6.1xC+
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.
ADSK
CRWV
33% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
~16%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
-33%
1-yr DCF upside
-25%
5-yr DCF upside
-10%
10-yr DCF upside
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
ADSK
Why this score
  • Durable high returns
CRWV
Why this score
  • Diluting shareholders
  • Short track record
ADSKAutodesk, Inc.
Software - Application · $253.82 · beta 1.30
Why now
Software - Application · market cap $53.6b. Down 23% from 52-week high of $329.09 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +18%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.96 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 34 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $314.19 (implying +24% upside).
Moat
Net margin 19% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 46% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 187% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Trailing P/E 37x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. 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.
CRWVCoreWeave, Inc.
Software - Infrastructure · $84.56
Why now
Software - Infrastructure · market cap $46.6b. Down 45% from 52-week high of $153.20 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +115% — in hypergrowth territory. 35 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $143.26 (implying +69% upside).
Moat
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
Free cash flow is negative (-$13.7b) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk. Currently unprofitable (margin -25.4%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk. Down 45% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
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 ADSK and CRWV diverge

On the headline score the gap is 63.6 points in favor of ADSK. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.

Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a 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.