COMPARE · Data as of August 27, 2026

ADSK vs ESTC

Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ADSK scored 81.7, ESTC scored 60.7 — ADSK leads.
Compare another set
ADSK
Autodesk, Inc.
Software - Application · Quality-Growth
81.7
$270.58 · $57.1B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
21.0
ADSK leads
ESTC
Elastic N.V.
Software - Application · Quality-Growth
60.7
$83.74 · $8.7B
fundamentals as of
  • CheapestESTC24.4x
  • Fastest growthADSK+18.3%
  • Strongest balance sheetESTC0.46
  • Highest qualityADSK88 / 100
THE BULL RANKINGS SCORECARD81.7/ 100 · BULL SCOREPEER MEDIANQUALITY87.9GROWTH85.9VALUE72.2
THE BULL RANKINGS SCORECARD60.7/ 100 · BULL SCOREPEER MEDIANQUALITY54.2GROWTH85.8VALUE48.2
ADSKESTCQuality87.954.2Growth85.985.8Value72.248.2
cheap & fastrevenue growth →← cheaper (lower multiple)7%28%19x45xADSKESTC

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.

FCFADSK$2.7bESTC$322m
RevADSK+18.3%ESTC+17.3%
D/EADSK0.85ESTC0.46
P/EADSK39.5xESTC24.4x
PEGADSK0.97ESTC1.37
ADSK
stronger →← stronger
ESTC
88
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
54
86
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
86
72
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
48
ADSK is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
ADSK
ESTC
$2.7bB
FCF
$322mC
+18.3%B+
Rev
+17.3%B+
0.85C+
D/E
0.46B
39.5xB
P/E
24.4xB+
0.97B+
PEG
1.37B
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
ESTC
41% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
26% above
~17%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~18%/yr
-38%
1-yr DCF upside
-36%
-29%
5-yr DCF upside
-21%
-16%
10-yr DCF upside
+7%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
ADSK
Why this score
  • Durable high returns
ESTC
No notable signals flagged.
ADSKAutodesk, Inc.
Software - Application · $270.58 · beta 1.30
Why now
Software - Application · market cap $57.1b. 18% off the 52-week high of $329.09. Revenue growing +18%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.97 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 34 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $314.57 (implying +16% 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 40x 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.
ESTCElastic N.V.
Software - Application · $83.74 · beta 0.97
Why now
Software - Application · market cap $8.7b. 13% off the 52-week high of $96.07. Revenue growing +17%, comfortably above the S&P median. 27 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $84.41 (implying +1% upside).
Moat
Net margin 21% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 29% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. 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
SaaS displacement — recurring revenue is sticky in good times but accelerates in churn during a downturn as customers consolidate vendors and renegotiate seat counts.
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 ESTC diverge

On the headline score the gap is 21.0 points in favor of ADSK. The widest single difference is Quality, where ADSK leads by 33.7 points.

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.