Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. EDU scored 78.0, LAUR scored 78.5 — LAUR leads.
Compare another set
EDU
New Oriental Education & Technology Group Inc.
Education & Training Services · Quality-Growth
78
$58.63 · $9.1B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
0.5
LAUR leads
LAUR
Laureate Education, Inc.
Education & Training Services · Quality-Growth
78.5
$39.47 · $5.4B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestLAUR17.9x
Fastest growthLAUR+17.9%
Strongest balance sheetEDU0.20
Highest qualityLAUR91 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueEDU-39%
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)
EDU
stronger →← stronger
LAUR
75
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
91
78
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
84
81
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
63
LAUR is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
EDU
LAUR
$780mC+
FCF
$287mC
+15.5%B+
Rev
+17.9%B+
0.20A-
D/E
0.64B+
19.5xB
P/E
17.9xB
1.00B+
PEG
1.09B+
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
EDU
LAUR
39% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
1% above
~-2%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~10%/yr
+42%
1-yr DCF upside
-14%
+64%
5-yr DCF upside
-1%
+104%
10-yr DCF upside
+20%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
EDU
Why this score
Buying back stock
LAUR
Why this score
Buying back stock
Durable high returns
The companies
EDUNew Oriental Education & Technology Group Inc.
Education & Training Services · $58.63 · beta 0.18
Why now
Education & Training Services · market cap $9.1b. 10% off the 52-week high of $64.97. Revenue growing +16%, comfortably above the S&P median. 20 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $73.62 (implying +26% upside).
Moat
ROE 12% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 164% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Mature compounder — the risk is paying up for quality at a moment when growth is decelerating. Watch for sequential revenue + margin trends; the inflection from "compounder" to "ex-compounder" is hard to spot until the multiple already started compressing.
LAURLaureate Education, Inc.
Education & Training Services · $39.47 · beta 0.47
Why now
Education & Training Services · market cap $5.4b. 4% off the 52-week high of $40.92. Revenue growing +18%, comfortably above the S&P median. 7 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $41.21 (implying +4% upside).
Moat
Net margin 18% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 28% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which.
Risk
Mature compounder — the risk is paying up for quality at a moment when growth is decelerating. Watch for sequential revenue + margin trends; the inflection from "compounder" to "ex-compounder" is hard to spot until the multiple already started compressing.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
The model slightly favors LAUR (75.4) over EDU (74.9), driven by LAUR's superior Quality pillar score of 91 and "Durable high returns." Conversely, a contrarian might prefer EDU for its significant 28% discount to DCF fair value and a lower implied growth rate of just 2% per year, indicating less market optimism is priced in.
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 EDU and LAUR diverge
On the headline score the gap is 0.5 points in favor of LAUR. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
ValueEDU 81.2 · LAUR 63.4EDU +17.8
QualityEDU 74.8 · LAUR 90.7LAUR +15.9
GrowthEDU 78.0 · LAUR 84.0LAUR +6.0
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 LAUR or EDU the better stock?
LAUR scores higher: LAUR 78.5, EDU 78.0 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 LAUR and EDU differ most?
The widest gap is value, where EDU leads by 18 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 LAUR and EDU 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.