Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. GOOG scored 80.4, CARG scored 82.4 — CARG leads.
Compare another set
GOOG
Alphabet Inc.
Internet Content & Information · Quality-Growth
80.4
$347.86 · $4.3T
fundamentals as of
Score gap
2.0
CARG leads
CARG
CarGurus, Inc.
Internet Content & Information · Quality-Growth
82.4
$28.85 · $2.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestCARG15.3x
Fastest growthGOOG+20.1%
Strongest balance sheetGOOG0.19
Highest qualityCARG86 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueCARG-44%
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)
GOOG
stronger →← stronger
CARG
84
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
86
91
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
82
68
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
79
CARG is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
GOOG
CARG
$53.3bA
FCF
$291mC
+20.1%A-
Rev
+13.7%B+
0.19A-
D/E
0.70B
17.5xB
P/E
15.3xB+
1.21B
PEG
0.63A-
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
GOOG
CARG
344% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
44% below
~54%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-5%/yr
-82%
1-yr DCF upside
+57%
-77%
5-yr DCF upside
+78%
-70%
10-yr DCF upside
+112%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
GOOG
Why this score
Durable high returns
CARG
Why this score
Buying back stock
The companies
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.
CARGCarGurus, Inc.
Internet Content & Information · $28.85 · beta 1.22
Why now
Internet Content & Information · market cap $2.6b. Down 30% from 52-week high of $41.22 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +14%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.63 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 11 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $41.27 (implying +43% 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 53% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 156% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Down 30% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
CARG leads GOOG by 1.9 points (83.5 to 81.6), its sharpest advantage coming in PEG (grade A-). A contrarian could still prefer GOOG for its stronger FCF (grade A). Note they play different roles — CARG screens as value, GOOG 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 GOOG and CARG diverge
On the headline score the gap is 2.0 points in favor of CARG. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
ValueGOOG 67.9 · CARG 79.1CARG +11.2
GrowthGOOG 90.5 · CARG 82.1GOOG +8.4
QualityGOOG 84.4 · CARG 86.2level
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 CARG or GOOG the better stock?
CARG scores higher: CARG 82.4, GOOG 80.4 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 CARG and GOOG differ most?
The widest gap is value, where CARG leads by 11 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 CARG and GOOG 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.