Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. CBZ scored 65.2, AMTM scored 70.2 — AMTM leads.
Compare another set
CBZ
CBIZ, Inc.
Specialty Business Services · Quality-Growth
65.2
$54.82 · $3.0B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
5.0
AMTM leads
AMTM
Amentum Holdings, Inc.
Specialty Business Services · Quality-Growth
70.2
$19.29 · $4.7B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestAMTM23.2x
Fastest growthAMTM+71.6%
Strongest balance sheetAMTM0.80
Highest qualityCBZ44 / 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)
CBZ
stronger →← stronger
AMTM
44
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
44
87
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
88
72
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
88
AMTM is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
CBZ
AMTM
$274mC
FCF
$474mC
+52.1%A
Rev
+71.6%A
1.02C+
D/E
0.80B
26.4xB
P/E
23.2xB+
1.22B
PEG
3.22D
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
CBZ
AMTM
55% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
56% below
~-5%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-6%/yr
+72%
1-yr DCF upside
+77%
+120%
5-yr DCF upside
+126%
+216%
10-yr DCF upside
+222%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
CBZ
No notable signals flagged.
AMTM
Why this score
Short track record
The companies
CBZCBIZ, Inc.
Specialty Business Services · $54.82 · beta 0.92
Why now
Specialty Business Services · market cap $3.0b. Trading near 52-week high of $56.41 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. Revenue growing +52% — in hypergrowth territory.
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income, mostly because of depreciation and amortization ($96m) — non-cash charges that hold down reported earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
Trading within 3% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. Net margin 4.4% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first. ROE 6% 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.
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.
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 CBZ and AMTM diverge
On the headline score the gap is 5.0 points in favor of AMTM. The widest single difference is Value, where AMTM leads by 16.6 points.
ValueCBZ 71.7 · AMTM 88.3AMTM +16.6
GrowthCBZ 87.0 · AMTM 88.2level
QualityCBZ 44.5 · AMTM 44.4level
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 CBZ the better stock?
AMTM scores higher: AMTM 70.2, CBZ 65.2 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 AMTM and CBZ differ most?
The widest gap is value, where AMTM leads by 17 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. The other two pillars are close enough to call level, so this is the one place they genuinely separate.
How are AMTM and CBZ 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.