COMPARE · Data as of August 24, 2026
EXLS vs INOD
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. EXLS scored 81.2, INOD scored 86.1 — INOD leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. INOD's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but EXLS'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.
EXLS
ExlService Holdings, Inc.
81.2
$37.66 · $5.8B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
4.9
INOD leads
INOD
Innodata Inc.
86.1
$57.13 · $2.0B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestEXLS23.8x
- Fastest growthINOD+39.0%
- Strongest balance sheetINOD0.02
- Highest qualityINOD86 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueINOD-54%
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)
EXLS
stronger →← stronger
INOD
85
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
86
88
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
97
71
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
77
INOD is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
EXLS
INOD
$297mC
FCF
$184mC
+13.4%B+
Rev
+39.0%A
0.57C+
D/E
0.02A-
23.8xB+
P/E
44.3xC+
1.11B+
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
EXLS
INOD
12% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
54% below
~5%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-5%/yr
0%
1-yr DCF upside
+67%
+14%
5-yr DCF upside
+120%
+39%
10-yr DCF upside
+228%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
EXLS
Why this score
- Buying back stock
- Durable high returns
INOD
Why this score
- Durable high returns
- Diluting shareholders
The companies
EXLSExlService Holdings, Inc.
Why now
Information Technology Services · market cap $5.8b. 16% off the 52-week high of $45.08. Revenue growing +13%, comfortably above the S&P median. 8 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $44.38 (implying +18% upside).
Moat
ROE 32% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 118% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
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.
INODInnodata Inc.
Why now
Information Technology Services · market cap $2.0b. Down 54% 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 publish a mean 1-yr target of $122.75 (implying +115% 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 54% 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 44x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
INOD leads EXLS by 4.9 points (86.1 to 81.2), its sharpest advantage coming in D/E (grade A-). A contrarian could still prefer EXLS, which trades about 12% below our DCF fair value — a margin of safety the score doesn't reward.
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 EXLS and INOD diverge
On the headline score the gap is 4.9 points in favor of INOD. The widest single difference is Growth, where INOD leads by 9.3 points.
- GrowthEXLS 88.2 · INOD 97.5INOD +9.3
- ValueEXLS 71.5 · INOD 76.5INOD +5.0
- QualityEXLS 84.9 · INOD 85.6level
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.