COMPARE · Data as of August 28, 2026
GPN vs HURN
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. GPN scored 53.3, HURN scored 70.6 — HURN leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. GPN's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but HURN'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.
GPN
Global Payments Inc.
53.3
$91.82 · $24.3B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
17.3
HURN leads
HURN
Huron Consulting Group Inc.
70.6
$159.84 · $2.5B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestHURN24.0x
- Fastest growthGPN+32.5%
- Strongest balance sheetGPN0.98
- Highest qualityHURN67 / 100
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)
GPN
stronger →← stronger
HURN
35
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
67
67
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
87
65
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
60
HURN is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
GPN
HURN
$823mC+
FCF
$124mC
+32.5%A
Rev
+11.8%B
0.98C+
D/E
2.25D
43.9xC
P/E
24.0xB+
0.27A
PEG
1.47B
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
GPN
HURN
21% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
7% above
~15%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~11%/yr
-31%
1-yr DCF upside
-20%
-17%
5-yr DCF upside
-7%
+8%
10-yr DCF upside
+17%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
GPN
Why this score
- Diluting shareholders
HURN
Why this score
- Buying back stock
The companies
GPNGlobal Payments Inc.
Why now
Specialty Business Services · market cap $24.3b. 4% off the 52-week high of $95.88. Revenue growing +33% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.27 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 28 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $103.00 (implying +12% upside).
Moat
Moat signals from the quantitative card are modest — profitability and capital efficiency are middle-of-pack. The thesis here depends on softer factors (switching costs, brand, distribution, regulatory protection) not captured by the quality-growth screen.
Risk
Currently unprofitable (margin -9.1%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk. Trailing P/E 44x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. ROE -4% is below the long-run sustainable threshold of ~10% — capital efficiency would need to improve for the equity base to compound at the market rate.
HURNHuron Consulting Group Inc.
Why now
Consulting Services · market cap $2.5b. 14% off the 52-week high of $186.78. Revenue growing +12%, comfortably above the S&P median. 4 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $190.75 (implying +19% upside).
Moat
ROE 26% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 119% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
D/E 2.25 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer.
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 GPN and HURN diverge
On the headline score the gap is 17.3 points in favor of HURN. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- QualityGPN 34.8 · HURN 67.4HURN +32.6
- GrowthGPN 67.2 · HURN 86.6HURN +19.4
- ValueGPN 64.8 · HURN 60.3GPN +4.5
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.