COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
EDU vs LRN
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. EDU scored 86.0, LRN scored 81.9 — EDU leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. LRN's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but EDU's are as of May 2025 — a 13-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
EDU
New Oriental Education & Techno
86
$54.91
fundamentals as of
Score gap
4.1
EDU leads
LRN
Stride, Inc.
81.9
$84.07 · $3.5B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestLRN11.8x
- Fastest growthEDU+13.6%
- Strongest balance sheetEDU0.20
- Highest qualityLRN86 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueLRN-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.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
EDU
LRN
$655mC+
FCF
$433mC
+13.6%B+
Rev
+4.7%C+
0.20A-
D/E
0.33A-
18.3xB+
P/E
11.8xA
1.03B+
PEG
0.49A
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
EDU
LRN
—
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
49% below
—
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-11%/yr
—
1-yr DCF upside
+88%
—
5-yr DCF upside
+97%
—
10-yr DCF upside
+109%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
EDU
No notable signals flagged.
LRN
Why this score
- Buying back stock
- Durable high returns
The companies
EDUNew Oriental Education & Techno
Why now
Education & Training Services · market cap n/a. 15% off the 52-week high of $64.97. Revenue growing +14%, comfortably above the S&P median. 21 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $73.30 (implying +33% upside).
Moat
ROE 10% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 176% 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.
LRNStride, Inc.
Why now
Education & Training Services · market cap $3.5b. Down 51% from 52-week high of $171.17 — deep drawdown territory. PEG 0.49 — paying under fair value for the growth rate.
Moat
Net margin 13% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 21% sits above Buffett's preferred 15% threshold — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 128% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Down 51% 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
The model favors LRN (84.5) over EDU (74.5) primarily due to LRN's superior Value pillar score of 97 versus EDU's 73, reflected in its A grades for P/E (11.2x) and PEG (0.48). However, a contrarian might prefer EDU for its significantly higher revenue growth of +13.6% (B+) compared to LRN's +4.7% (C+).
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.