Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. DAVE scored 84.2, PRGS scored 67.9 — DAVE leads.
Compare another set
DAVE
Dave Inc.
Software - Application · Quality-Growth
84.2
$368.42 · $4.7B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
16.3
DAVE leads
PRGS
Progress Software Corporation
Software - Infrastructure · Quality-Growth
67.9
$39.33 · $1.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestPRGS18.1x
Fastest growthDAVE+59.7%
Strongest balance sheetDAVE1.29
Highest qualityDAVE76 / 100
Largest discount to fair valuePRGS-76%
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)
DAVE
stronger →← stronger
PRGS
76
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
67
99
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
66
80
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
71
DAVE is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
DAVE
PRGS
$319mC
FCF
$319mC
+59.7%A
Rev
+6.4%C+
1.29C
D/E
2.39D
23.8xB+
P/E
18.1xA-
0.85B+
PEG
1.10B+
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
DAVE
PRGS
3% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
76% below
~16%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-23%/yr
-25%
1-yr DCF upside
+261%
-3%
5-yr DCF upside
+322%
+36%
10-yr DCF upside
+431%
These two disagree on this pair: the Value pillar ranks cheapness against sector peers, while price-vs-fair-value is an absolute read. A name can be the better value in its sector and still the dearer one on cash flows.
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
DAVE
Why this score
Durable high returns
Diluting shareholders
PRGS
Why this score
Buying back stock
The companies
DAVEDave Inc.
Software - Application · $368.42 · beta 3.93
Why now
Software - Application · market cap $4.7b. 20% off the 52-week high of $458.25. Revenue growing +60% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.85 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 14 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $444.21 (implying +21% upside).
Moat
Net margin 35% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. FCF converts 143% 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
Beta 3.93 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. SaaS displacement — recurring revenue is sticky in good times but accelerates in churn during a downturn as customers consolidate vendors and renegotiate seat counts.
PRGSProgress Software Corporation
Software - Infrastructure · $39.33 · beta 0.89
Why now
Software - Infrastructure · market cap $1.6b. 17% off the 52-week high of $47.25. 5 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $56.20 (implying +43% upside).
Moat
ROE 17% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income, mostly because of depreciation and amortization ($148m) — non-cash charges that hold down reported earnings while cash generation stays strong. 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
D/E 2.39 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. 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 DAVE and PRGS diverge
On the headline score the gap is 16.3 points in favor of DAVE. The widest single difference is Growth, where DAVE leads by 33.0 points.
GrowthDAVE 98.6 · PRGS 65.6DAVE +33.0
ValueDAVE 80.2 · PRGS 70.9DAVE +9.3
QualityDAVE 75.5 · PRGS 67.3DAVE +8.2
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 DAVE or PRGS the better stock?
DAVE scores higher: DAVE 84.2, PRGS 67.9 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 DAVE and PRGS differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where DAVE leads by 33 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. DAVE leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are DAVE and PRGS 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.