Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. GENI scored 20.1, GOOG scored 80.4 — GOOG leads.
Compare another set
GENI
Genius Sports Limited
Internet Content & Information · Quality-Growth
20.1
$6.65 · $1.8B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
60.3
GOOG leads
GOOG
Alphabet Inc.
Internet Content & Information · Quality-Growth
80.4
$347.86 · $4.3T
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Fastest growthGENI+31.0%
Strongest balance sheetGOOG0.19
Highest qualityGOOG84 / 100
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
GENI
stronger →← stronger
GOOG
13
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
84
94
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
91
7
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
68
GOOG is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
GENI
GOOG
-$117mF
FCF
$53.3bA
+31.0%A
Rev
+20.1%A-
1.20C+
D/E
0.19A-
2.3xB
P/S
—
—
PEG
1.21B
—
P/E
17.5xB
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
GENI
GOOG
—
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
344% above
—
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~54%/yr
—
1-yr DCF upside
-82%
—
5-yr DCF upside
-77%
—
10-yr DCF upside
-70%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
GENI
No notable signals flagged.
GOOG
Why this score
Durable high returns
The companies
GENIGenius Sports Limited
Internet Content & Information · $6.65 · beta 1.91
Why now
Internet Content & Information · market cap $1.8b. Down 46% from 52-week high of $12.39 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +31% — in hypergrowth territory. 21 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $10.83 (implying +63% upside).
Moat
Turnaround / out-of-favor name — GAAP-unprofitable for now, so the durability case is forward-looking: it rests on a recovery (margin normalization, a cyclical upturn or restructuring) or an un-monetized asset (IP / network effects / first-mover position) rather than on current reported results.
Risk
Free cash flow is negative (-$117m) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk. Currently unprofitable (margin -23.0%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk. Down 46% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
GOOGAlphabet Inc.
Internet Content & Information · $347.86 · beta 1.21
Why now
Internet Content & Information · market cap $4.3T. 14% off the 52-week high of $404.47. Revenue growing +20%, comfortably above the S&P median. 14 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $420.36 (implying +21% upside).
Moat
Net margin 55% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 38% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. $4.3T market cap places it among the largest companies in the sector — distribution, R&D, and customer-acquisition costs amortize across a base peers can't replicate.
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
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 GENI and GOOG diverge
On the headline score the gap is 60.3 points in favor of GOOG. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
QualityGENI 12.8 · GOOG 84.4GOOG +71.6
ValueGENI 6.8 · GOOG 67.9GOOG +61.1
GrowthGENI 93.9 · GOOG 90.5GENI +3.4
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 GOOG or GENI the better stock?
GOOG scores higher: GOOG 80.4, GENI 20.1 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 GOOG and GENI differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where GOOG leads by 72 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 GOOG and GENI 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.