COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
EPAM vs EXLS
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. EPAM scored 82.0, EXLS scored 81.8 — EPAM leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. EPAM's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but EXLS's are as of March 2026 — a 3-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
EPAM
EPAM Systems, Inc.
82
$106.76 · $5.5B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
0.2
EPAM leads
EXLS
ExlService Holdings, Inc.
81.8
$37.05 · $5.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestEPAM14.5x
- Fastest growthEXLS+13.4%
- Strongest balance sheetEPAM0.04
- Highest qualityEXLS85 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueEXLS-14%
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
EXLS
73
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
85
82
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
88
92
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
73
EXLS is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
EPAM
EXLS
$483mC
FCF
$297mC
+10.8%B
Rev
+13.4%B+
0.04A-
D/E
0.57C+
14.5xA-
P/E
23.4xB+
0.57A-
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
EPAM
EXLS
8% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
14% below
~3%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~5%/yr
+4%
1-yr DCF upside
+2%
+9%
5-yr DCF upside
+17%
+16%
10-yr DCF upside
+43%
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
EXLS
Why this score
- Buying back stock
- Durable high returns
The companies
EPAMEPAM Systems, Inc.
Why now
Information Technology Services · market cap $5.5b. Down 52% from 52-week high of $222.53 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +11%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.57 — 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 +15% 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, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Down 52% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
EXLSExlService Holdings, Inc.
Why now
Information Technology Services · market cap $5.6b. 18% off the 52-week high of $45.08. Revenue growing +13%, comfortably above the S&P median. 8 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $44.38 (implying +20% upside).
Moat
ROE 32% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 118% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
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 EXLS by 0.2 points (82.0 to 81.8), its sharpest advantage coming in D/E (grade A-). A contrarian could still prefer EXLS, which trades about 13% below our DCF fair value — a margin of safety the score doesn't reward. Note they play different roles — EPAM screens as value, EXLS screens as growth — 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 EXLS diverge
The two are effectively level on the headline score. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- ValueEPAM 91.7 · EXLS 72.9EPAM +18.8
- QualityEPAM 73.2 · EXLS 85.0EXLS +11.8
- GrowthEPAM 82.3 · EXLS 88.2EXLS +5.9
Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a 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.