COMPARE · Data as of August 24, 2026
CTSH vs INOD
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. CTSH scored 76.2, INOD scored 79.8 — INOD leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. INOD's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but CTSH'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.
CTSH
Cognizant Technology Solutions Corporation
76.2
$62.20 · $28.0B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
3.6
INOD leads
INOD
Innodata Inc.
79.8
$64.21 · $2.2B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestCTSH13.3x
- Fastest growthINOD+39.0%
- Strongest balance sheetINOD0.02
- Highest qualityINOD86 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueINOD-49%
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)
CTSH
stronger →← stronger
INOD
81
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
86
70
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
97
79
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
61
INOD is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
CTSH
INOD
$2.5bB
FCF
$184mC
+6.5%C+
Rev
+39.0%A
0.14B+
D/E
0.02A-
13.3xA
P/E
49.8xC+
0.99B+
PEG
0.87B+
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
CTSH
INOD
44% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
49% below
~-7%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-2%/yr
+63%
1-yr DCF upside
+49%
+79%
5-yr DCF upside
+96%
+105%
10-yr DCF upside
+192%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
CTSH
Why this score
- Buying back stock
- Raising its dividend
- Durable high returns
INOD
Why this score
- Durable high returns
- Diluting shareholders
The companies
CTSHCognizant Technology Solutions Corporation
Why now
Information Technology Services · market cap $28.0b. Down 29% from 52-week high of $87.03 — deep drawdown territory. PEG 0.99 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 25 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $63.94 (implying +3% upside).
Moat
ROE 15% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 111% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Value re-rating depends on a catalyst. Without one — analyst day, divestiture, margin recovery, capital return — the stock can stay cheap on these multiples for years.
INODInnodata Inc.
Why now
Information Technology Services · market cap $2.2b. Down 49% from 52-week high of $125.14 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +39% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.87 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 4 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $122.75 (implying +91% 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. ROE 29% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income — non-cash charges (depreciation, intangible amortization) are holding down GAAP earnings while cash generation stays strong.
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. Beta 2.92 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 50x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
CTSH and INOD score effectively even on the Bull Rankings model (77.6 versus 77.6), so none holds a clear model edge — the call comes down to which trade-off you weight more: sector exposure (Information Technology Services) and valuation.
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 CTSH and INOD diverge
On the headline score the gap is 3.6 points in favor of INOD. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- GrowthCTSH 69.6 · INOD 97.5INOD +27.9
- ValueCTSH 78.8 · INOD 60.8CTSH +18.0
- QualityCTSH 80.6 · INOD 85.5INOD +4.9
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.