Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. CRWV scored 18.4, GRND scored 90.4 — GRND leads.
Compare another set
CRWV
CoreWeave, Inc.
Software - Infrastructure · Quality-Growth
18.4
$82.08 · $45.3B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
72.0
GRND leads
GRND
Grindr Inc.
Software - Application · Quality-Growth
90.4
$15.03 · $2.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Fastest growthCRWV+167.9%
Highest qualityGRND94 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueGRND-27%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
CRWV
stronger →← stronger
GRND
13
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
94
100
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
96
5
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
82
GRND is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
CRWV
GRND
-$13.7bF
FCF
$154mC
+167.9%A
Rev
+32.4%A
—
D/E
Negative equity
6.0xB
P/S
—
—
PEG
1.13B+
—
P/E
32.0xB
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
CRWV
GRND
—
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
27% below
—
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~7%/yr
—
1-yr DCF upside
+5%
—
5-yr DCF upside
+37%
—
10-yr DCF upside
+102%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
CRWV
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
Short track record
GRND
Why this score
Buying back stock
Durable high returns
The companies
CRWVCoreWeave, Inc.
Software - Infrastructure · $82.08
Why now
Software - Infrastructure · market cap $45.3b. Down 45% from 52-week high of $150.40 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +168% — in hypergrowth territory. 38 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $141.47 (implying +72% 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.
GRNDGrindr Inc.
Software - Application · $15.03 · beta 0.19
Why now
Software - Application · market cap $2.6b. 19% off the 52-week high of $18.50. Revenue growing +32% — in hypergrowth territory. 5 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $20.80 (implying +38% 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. FCF converts 161% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash. 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
Trailing P/E 32x 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.
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 CRWV and GRND diverge
On the headline score the gap is 72.0 points in favor of GRND. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
QualityCRWV 12.5 · GRND 93.7GRND +81.2
ValueCRWV 5.0 · GRND 81.9GRND +76.9
GrowthCRWV 100.0 · GRND 96.3CRWV +3.7
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 GRND or CRWV the better stock?
GRND scores higher: GRND 90.4, CRWV 18.4 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 GRND and CRWV differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where GRND leads by 81 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 GRND and CRWV 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.