Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. INOD scored 83.7, G scored 74.5 — INOD leads.
Compare another set
INOD
Innodata Inc.
Information Technology Services · Quality-Growth
83.7
$62.04 · $2.1B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
9.2
INOD leads
G
Genpact Limited
Information Technology Services · Quality-Growth
74.5
$34.40 · $5.8B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestG10.2x
Fastest growthINOD+47.6%
Strongest balance sheetINOD0.02
Highest qualityINOD85 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueG-56%
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)
INOD
stronger →← stronger
G
85
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
80
98
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
65
70
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
79
INOD is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
INOD
G
$184mC
FCF
$549mC+
+47.6%A
Rev
+6.6%C+
0.02A-
D/E
0.54B
48.1xC+
P/E
10.2xA
0.87B+
PEG
1.16B+
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
INOD
G
19% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
56% below
~10%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-13%/yr
-4%
1-yr DCF upside
+117%
+23%
5-yr DCF upside
+126%
+73%
10-yr DCF upside
+139%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
INOD
Why this score
Durable high returns
Diluting shareholders
G
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
Durable high returns
The companies
INODInnodata Inc.
Information Technology Services · $62.04 · beta 2.98
Why now
Information Technology Services · market cap $2.1b. Down 50% from 52-week high of $125.14 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +48% — 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 +98% 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 38% — 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, mostly because of cash released from working capital ($120m) — a release that doesn't repeat every year the way earnings can.
Risk
Down 50% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 2.98 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 48x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
GGenpact Limited
Information Technology Services · $34.40 · beta 0.58
Why now
Information Technology Services · market cap $5.8b. Down 29% from 52-week high of $48.64 — deep drawdown territory. 11 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $42.18 (implying +23% upside).
Moat
ROE 22% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately.
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.
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 INOD and G diverge
On the headline score the gap is 9.2 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.
GrowthINOD 97.9 · G 65.4INOD +32.5
ValueINOD 70.1 · G 78.8G +8.7
QualityINOD 85.4 · G 80.5INOD +4.9
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 INOD or G the better stock?
INOD scores higher: INOD 83.7, G 74.5 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 INOD and G differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where INOD leads by 33 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 INOD and G 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.