Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. AMTM scored 70.2, KFY scored 65.1 — AMTM leads.
Compare another set
AMTM
Amentum Holdings, Inc.
Specialty Business Services · Quality-Growth
70.2
$19.29 · $4.7B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
5.1
AMTM leads
KFY
Korn Ferry
Staffing & Employment Services · Quality-Growth
65.1
$71.66 · $4.0B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestKFY13.5x
Fastest growthAMTM+71.6%
Strongest balance sheetKFY0.30
Highest qualityKFY71 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueAMTM-56%
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)
AMTM
stronger →← stronger
KFY
44
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
71
88
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
61
88
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
64
AMTM is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
AMTM
KFY
$474mC
FCF
$319mC
+71.6%A
Rev
+6.4%C+
0.80B
D/E
0.30A-
23.2xB+
P/E
13.5xA-
3.22D
PEG
1.20B+
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
AMTM
KFY
56% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
11% below
~-6%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~4%/yr
+77%
1-yr DCF upside
+3%
+126%
5-yr DCF upside
+12%
+222%
10-yr DCF upside
+25%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
AMTM
Why this score
Short track record
KFY
Why this score
Raising its dividend
Diluting shareholders
The companies
AMTMAmentum Holdings, Inc.
Specialty Business Services · $19.29 · beta 0.31
Why now
Specialty Business Services · market cap $4.7b. Down 49% from 52-week high of $38.11 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +72% — in hypergrowth territory. 12 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $29.42 (implying +52% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income, mostly because of depreciation and amortization ($439m) — non-cash charges that hold down reported earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
Down 49% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Net margin 1.4% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first. ROE 4% is below the long-run sustainable threshold of ~10% — capital efficiency would need to improve for the equity base to compound at the market rate.
Staffing & Employment Services · market cap $4.0b. 18% off the 52-week high of $87.51. 4 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $90.25 (implying +26% upside).
Moat
ROE 15% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 115% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Value re-rating depends on a catalyst. Without one — analyst day, divestiture, margin recovery, capital return — the stock can stay cheap on these multiples for years.
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 AMTM and KFY diverge
On the headline score the gap is 5.1 points in favor of AMTM. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
GrowthAMTM 88.2 · KFY 61.2AMTM +27.0
QualityAMTM 44.4 · KFY 70.7KFY +26.3
ValueAMTM 88.3 · KFY 63.7AMTM +24.6
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 AMTM or KFY the better stock?
AMTM scores higher: AMTM 70.2, KFY 65.1 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 AMTM and KFY differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where AMTM leads by 27 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. Neither name sweeps: they trade the lead across the three pillars, so the comparison is a trade-off rather than one being better on every measure.
How are AMTM and KFY 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.