Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. EPAM scored 79.8, BR scored 73.4 — EPAM leads.
Compare another set
EPAM
EPAM Systems, Inc.
Information Technology Services · Quality-Growth
79.8
$113.24 · $5.8B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
6.4
EPAM leads
BR
Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc.
Information Technology Services · Quality-Growth
73.4
$165.45 · $18.7B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestEPAM15.4x
Fastest growthEPAM+15.4%
Strongest balance sheetEPAM0.04
Highest qualityBR82 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueEPAM-17%
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)
EPAM
stronger →← stronger
BR
73
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
82
80
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
69
86
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
70
EPAM is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
EPAM
BR
$483mC
FCF
$1.2bC+
+15.4%B+
Rev
+8.5%B
0.04A-
D/E
1.24C
15.4xA-
P/E
17.2xA-
0.61A-
PEG
1.80C+
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
EPAM
BR
17% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
13% below
~5%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~3%/yr
+5%
1-yr DCF upside
+8%
+21%
5-yr DCF upside
+15%
+47%
10-yr DCF upside
+26%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
EPAM
Why this score
Buying back stock
BR
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
Durable high returns
The companies
EPAMEPAM Systems, Inc.
Information Technology Services · $113.24 · beta 1.39
Why now
Information Technology Services · market cap $5.8b. Down 49% from 52-week high of $222.53 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +15%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.61 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 17 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $122.82 (implying +8% upside).
Moat
ROE 11% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 120% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
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.
BRBroadridge Financial Solutions, Inc.
Information Technology Services · $165.45 · beta 0.93
Why now
Information Technology Services · market cap $18.7b. Down 30% from 52-week high of $236.02 — deep drawdown territory. 8 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $213.38 (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 41% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 110% 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.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
EPAM leads BR by 2.5 points (80.2 to 77.7), its sharpest advantage coming in D/E (grade B+). A contrarian could still prefer BR, which trades about 21% below our DCF fair value — a margin of safety the score doesn't reward. Note they play different roles — BR screens as growth, EPAM screens as value — so the model rewards different traits for each.
Our AI analyst is busy right now, so this verdict is drawn directly from the pillars, grades and DCF above.
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 EPAM and BR diverge
On the headline score the gap is 6.4 points in favor of EPAM. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
ValueEPAM 86.4 · BR 69.9EPAM +16.5
GrowthEPAM 80.2 · BR 69.2EPAM +11.0
QualityEPAM 73.3 · BR 81.6BR +8.3
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 EPAM or BR the better stock?
EPAM scores higher: EPAM 79.8, BR 73.4 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 EPAM and BR differ most?
The widest gap is value, where EPAM leads by 17 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 EPAM and BR 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.