Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. HPE scored 60.0, ZBRA scored 67.2 — ZBRA leads.
Compare another set
HPE
Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company
Communication Equipment · Quality-Growth
60
$73.46 · $97.5B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
7.2
ZBRA leads
ZBRA
Zebra Technologies Corporation
Communication Equipment · Quality-Growth
67.2
$387.18 · $18.3B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestZBRA35.5x
Fastest growthHPE+26.6%
Strongest balance sheetHPE0.76
Highest qualityZBRA77 / 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)
HPE
stronger →← stronger
ZBRA
51
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
77
86
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
76
49
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
52
ZBRA is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
HPE
ZBRA
$4.2bB
FCF
$904mC+
+26.6%A-
Rev
+12.7%B+
0.76C+
D/E
0.86C+
37.9xB
P/E
35.5xB
0.57A-
PEG
0.64A-
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
HPE
ZBRA
39% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
91% above
~23%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~22%/yr
-43%
1-yr DCF upside
-49%
-28%
5-yr DCF upside
-48%
0%
10-yr DCF upside
-46%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
HPE
Why this score
Raising its dividend
ZBRA
Why this score
Buying back stock
The companies
HPEHewlett Packard Enterprise Company
Communication Equipment · $73.46 · beta 1.40
Why now
Communication Equipment · market cap $97.5b. Trading near 52-week high of $73.56 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. Revenue growing +27% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.57 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 21 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $72.03 (implying -2% upside).
Moat
ROE 11% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 149% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash. $97.5b 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
Trading within 0% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. Beta 1.40 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. Trailing P/E 38x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
ZBRAZebra Technologies Corporation
Communication Equipment · $387.18 · beta 1.58
Why now
Communication Equipment · market cap $18.3b. Trading near 52-week high of $390.80 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. Revenue growing +13%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.64 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 15 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $413.85 (implying +7% upside).
Moat
ROE 16% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 168% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Trading within 1% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. Beta 1.58 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. Trailing P/E 35x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
ZBRA leads HPE by 13.6 points (70.5 to 56.9), its sharpest advantage coming in P/E (grade B). A contrarian could still prefer HPE for its stronger FCF (grade B).
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 HPE and ZBRA diverge
On the headline score the gap is 7.2 points in favor of ZBRA. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
QualityHPE 50.9 · ZBRA 76.9ZBRA +26.0
GrowthHPE 85.9 · ZBRA 76.1HPE +9.8
ValueHPE 49.4 · ZBRA 51.9level
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 ZBRA or HPE the better stock?
ZBRA scores higher: ZBRA 67.2, HPE 60.0 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 ZBRA and HPE differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where ZBRA leads by 26 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 ZBRA and HPE 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.