COMPARE · Data as of August 24, 2026
GENI vs META
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. GENI scored 37.7, META scored 79.1 — META leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. META's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but GENI's are as of December 2025 — a 6-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
GENI
Genius Sports Limited
37.7
$7.99 · $2.1B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
41.4
META leads
META
Meta Platforms, Inc.
79.1
$559.02 · $1.4T
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- Fastest growthGENI+31.0%
- Strongest balance sheetMETA0.43
- Highest qualityMETA87 / 100
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
GENI
stronger →← stronger
META
25
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
87
94
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
92
23
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
62
META is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
GENI
META
$65mC-
FCF
$41.0bA
+31.0%A
Rev
+27.7%A-
1.20C+
D/E
0.43B+
3.2xC+
P/S
—
—
PEG
0.82B+
—
P/E
20.7xB
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
META
142% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
134% above
~41%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~30%/yr
-68%
1-yr DCF upside
-62%
-59%
5-yr DCF upside
-57%
-42%
10-yr DCF upside
-51%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
GENI
No notable signals flagged.
META
Why this score
- Durable high returns
The companies
GENIGenius Sports Limited
Why now
Internet Content & Information · market cap $2.1b. Down 42% from 52-week high of $13.73 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +31% — in hypergrowth territory. 20 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $10.93 (implying +37% 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
Currently unprofitable (margin -16.7%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk. Down 42% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 1.88 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return.
METAMeta Platforms, Inc.
Why now
Internet Content & Information · market cap $1.4T. Down 29% from 52-week high of $790.80 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +28% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.82 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 57 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $754.14 (implying +35% upside).
Moat
Net margin 30% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 26% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. $1.4T 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
Value re-rating depends on a catalyst. Without one — analyst day, divestiture, margin recovery, capital return — the stock can stay cheap on these multiples for years.
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 META diverge
On the headline score the gap is 41.4 points in favor of META. The widest single difference is Quality, where META leads by 62.0 points.
- QualityGENI 24.5 · META 86.5META +62.0
- ValueGENI 23.3 · META 62.0META +38.7
- GrowthGENI 93.9 · META 92.4level
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.