Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. IBM scored 58.3, EPAM scored 79.8 — EPAM leads.
Compare another set
IBM
International Business Machines Corporation
Information Technology Services · Quality-Growth
58.3
$227.13 · $214.0B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
21.5
EPAM leads
EPAM
EPAM Systems, Inc.
Information Technology Services · Quality-Growth
79.8
$113.24 · $5.8B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestEPAM15.4x
Fastest growthEPAM+15.4%
Strongest balance sheetEPAM0.04
Highest qualityEPAM73 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueIBM-20%
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)
IBM
stronger →← stronger
EPAM
70
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
73
60
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
80
47
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
86
EPAM is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
IBM
EPAM
$13.1bA-
FCF
$483mC
+7.6%B
Rev
+15.4%B+
1.89D
D/E
0.04A-
20.2xB+
P/E
15.4xA-
2.14C
PEG
0.61A-
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
IBM
EPAM
20% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
17% below
~0%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~5%/yr
+20%
1-yr DCF upside
+5%
+25%
5-yr DCF upside
+21%
+32%
10-yr DCF upside
+47%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
IBM
No notable signals flagged.
EPAM
Why this score
Buying back stock
The companies
IBMInternational Business Machines Corporation
Information Technology Services · $227.13 · beta 0.72
Why now
Information Technology Services · market cap $214.0b. Down 32% from 52-week high of $332.46 — deep drawdown territory. 23 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $240.56 (implying +6% upside).
Moat
Net margin 16% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 34% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 123% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Down 32% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
EPAMEPAM Systems, Inc.
Information Technology Services · $113.24 · beta 1.39
Why now
Information Technology Services · market cap $5.8b. Down 49% from 52-week high of $222.53 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +15%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.61 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 17 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $122.82 (implying +8% upside).
Moat
ROE 11% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 120% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Down 49% 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
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 IBM and EPAM diverge
On the headline score the gap is 21.5 points in favor of EPAM. The widest single difference is Value, where EPAM leads by 39.4 points.
ValueIBM 47.0 · EPAM 86.4EPAM +39.4
GrowthIBM 59.9 · EPAM 80.2EPAM +20.3
QualityIBM 70.2 · EPAM 73.3EPAM +3.1
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 EPAM or IBM the better stock?
EPAM scores higher: EPAM 79.8, IBM 58.3 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 EPAM and IBM differ most?
The widest gap is value, where EPAM leads by 39 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. EPAM leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are EPAM and IBM 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.