Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. LFTO scored 72.0, TTD scored 62.5 — LFTO leads.
Compare another set
LFTO
Liftoff Mobile, Inc.
Advertising Agencies · Quality-Growth
72
$15.41 · $2.6B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
9.5
LFTO leads
TTD
The Trade Desk, Inc.
Advertising Agencies · Quality-Growth
62.5
$12.08 · $5.7B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestTTD14.6x
Fastest growthLFTO+32.1%
Highest qualityLFTO87 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueTTD-63%
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)
LFTO
stronger →← stronger
TTD
87
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
85
95
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
54
51
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
53
LFTO is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
LFTO
TTD
$184mC
FCF
$863mC+
+32.1%A
Rev
+11.6%B
Negative equity
D/E
0.17A-
61.6xC
P/E
14.6xB+
0.67A-
PEG
—
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
LFTO
TTD
39% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
63% below
~3%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-15%/yr
+26%
1-yr DCF upside
+142%
+64%
5-yr DCF upside
+168%
+142%
10-yr DCF upside
+210%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
LFTO
Why this score
Short track record
TTD
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
LFTOLiftoff Mobile, Inc.
Advertising Agencies · $15.41
Why now
Advertising Agencies · market cap $2.6b. Down 49% from 52-week high of $30.10 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +32% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.67 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 15 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $33.40 (implying +117% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income, mostly because of depreciation and amortization ($92m) — non-cash charges that hold down reported earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
Trailing P/E 61.6x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. 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. Ad-spending cyclicality — marketing budgets are among the first cut in any recession and the last restored; the business levers higher in the bull but lower in the bear than the headline economy.
TTDThe Trade Desk, Inc.
Advertising Agencies · $12.08 · beta 0.99
Why now
Advertising Agencies · market cap $5.7b. Down 78% from 52-week high of $55.11 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +12%, comfortably above the S&P median. 30 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $13.57 (implying +12% upside).
Moat
Net margin 14% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 16% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income, mostly because of stock-based pay ($452m) — a real cost to shareholders, paid in shares rather than cash.
Risk
Down 78% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Ad-spending cyclicality — marketing budgets are among the first cut in any recession and the last restored; the business levers higher in the bull but lower in the bear than the headline economy.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
TTD leads LFTO by 9.7 points (81.7 to 72.0), its sharpest advantage coming in P/E (grade B+). A contrarian could still prefer LFTO, which trades about 37% below our DCF fair value — a margin of safety the score doesn't reward. Note they play different roles — LFTO screens as growth, TTD screens as value — so the model rewards different traits for each.
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 LFTO and TTD diverge
On the headline score the gap is 9.5 points in favor of LFTO. The widest single difference is Growth, where LFTO leads by 40.9 points.
GrowthLFTO 94.9 · TTD 54.0LFTO +40.9
ValueLFTO 51.4 · TTD 53.0level
QualityLFTO 86.7 · TTD 85.5level
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 LFTO or TTD the better stock?
LFTO scores higher: LFTO 72.0, TTD 62.5 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 LFTO and TTD differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where LFTO leads by 41 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. The other two pillars are close enough to call level, so this is the one place they genuinely separate.
How are LFTO and TTD 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.