Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. GRMN scored 65.0, TDY scored 53.9 — GRMN leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. TDY's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but GRMN'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.
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestGRMN27.7x
Fastest growthGRMN+15.7%
Strongest balance sheetGRMN0.03
Highest qualityGRMN85 / 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)
GRMN
stronger →← stronger
TDY
85
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
63
83
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
68
39
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
37
GRMN is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
GRMN
TDY
$1.5bC+
FCF
$1.1bC+
+15.7%B+
Rev
+7.9%B
0.03A-
D/E
0.19B
27.7xB
P/E
29.7xB
2.85C
PEG
1.40B
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
GRMN
TDY
75% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
39% above
~22%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~14%/yr
-48%
1-yr DCF upside
-32%
-43%
5-yr DCF upside
-28%
-34%
10-yr DCF upside
-22%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Scientific & Technical Instruments · market cap $51.8b. 15% off the 52-week high of $314.28. Revenue growing +16%, comfortably above the S&P median. 6 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $302.00 (implying +13% upside).
Moat
Net margin 23% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 19% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. $51.8b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
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.
Scientific & Technical Instruments · market cap $28.4b. 12% off the 52-week high of $697.67. 12 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $758.08 (implying +24% upside).
Moat
Net margin 15% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. FCF converts 117% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
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 GRMN and TDY diverge
On the headline score the gap is 11.1 points in favor of GRMN. The widest single difference is Quality, where GRMN leads by 22.1 points.
QualityGRMN 85.0 · TDY 62.9GRMN +22.1
GrowthGRMN 82.6 · TDY 68.2GRMN +14.4
ValueGRMN 39.1 · TDY 36.6level
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 GRMN or TDY the better stock?
GRMN scores higher: GRMN 65.0, TDY 53.9 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 GRMN and TDY differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where GRMN leads by 22 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. GRMN also leads growth, while value is effectively level between them.
How are GRMN and TDY 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.