COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
ATS vs VRT
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ATS scored 27.4, VRT scored 74.1 — VRT leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. VRT's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but ATS's are as of March 2025 — a 15-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
ATS
ATS Corporation
27.4
$19.74 · $1.9B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
46.7
VRT leads
VRT
Vertiv Holdings Co
74.1
$261.95 · $100.8B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestATS56.4x
- Fastest growthVRT+26.2%
- Strongest balance sheetVRT0.70
- Highest qualityVRT86 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueATS-34%
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)
ATS
stronger →← stronger
VRT
35
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
86
14
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
91
47
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
52
VRT is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
ATS
VRT
$149mC
FCF
$2.9bB
-16.5%F
Rev
+26.2%A-
0.78B
D/E
0.70B
56.4xD
P/E
59.1xD
2.09C
PEG
1.28B
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
ATS
VRT
34% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
156% above
~4%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~42%/yr
+16%
1-yr DCF upside
-70%
+52%
5-yr DCF upside
-61%
+123%
10-yr DCF upside
-45%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
ATS
Why this score
- Foreign reporter (CAD)
VRT
Why this score
- Durable high returns
The companies
ATSATS Corporation
Why now
Specialty Industrial Machinery · market cap $1.9b. Down 45% from 52-week high of $35.82 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue -16% — in contraction; any catalyst that reverses this triggers re-rating.
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income — non-cash charges (depreciation, intangible amortization) are holding down GAAP earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
Trailing P/E 56.4x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Revenue contracting -16% — the operational turn is not yet visible in the top line. Currently unprofitable (margin -1.1%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk.
VRTVertiv Holdings Co
Why now
Electrical Equipment & Parts · market cap $100.8b. Down 31% from 52-week high of $379.94 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +26% — in hypergrowth territory. 26 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $338.15 (implying +29% upside).
Moat
Net margin 15% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 36% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 169% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Trailing P/E 59.1x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Down 31% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 2.08 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return.
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 ATS and VRT diverge
On the headline score the gap is 46.7 points in favor of VRT. The widest single difference is Growth, where VRT leads by 76.5 points.
- GrowthATS 14.3 · VRT 90.8VRT +76.5
- QualityATS 35.4 · VRT 86.1VRT +50.7
- ValueATS 47.4 · VRT 52.0VRT +4.6
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.