COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
ADSK vs NICE
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ADSK scored 82.2, NICE scored 82.2 — tied at the top.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. ADSK's fundamentals are as of April 2026, but NICE's are as of December 2025 — a 4-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
ADSK
Autodesk, Inc.
82.2
$253.82 · $53.6B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
0.0
Tied
NICE
NICE Ltd.
82.2
$100.24 · $5.9B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestNICE14.6x
- Fastest growthADSK+18.3%
- Strongest balance sheetNICE0.02
- Highest qualityADSK88 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueNICE-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)
ADSK
stronger →← stronger
NICE
88
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
84
86
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
76
73
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
87
ADSK is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
ADSK
NICE
$2.7bB
FCF
$698mC+
+18.3%B+
Rev
+7.7%B
0.85C+
D/E
0.02A-
37.1xB
P/E
14.6xA-
0.96B+
PEG
0.75A-
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
ADSK
NICE
33% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
54% below
~16%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-10%/yr
-33%
1-yr DCF upside
+92%
-25%
5-yr DCF upside
+119%
-10%
10-yr DCF upside
+165%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
ADSK
Why this score
- Durable high returns
NICE
Why this score
- Buying back stock
The companies
ADSKAutodesk, Inc.
Why now
Software - Application · market cap $53.6b. Down 23% from 52-week high of $329.09 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +18%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.96 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 34 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $314.19 (implying +24% upside).
Moat
Net margin 19% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 46% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 187% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Trailing P/E 37x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. Software — competitive moat is durable until it isn't; watch net revenue retention, gross margin trends, and any new market entrant with a fundamentally lower price point.
NICENICE Ltd.
Why now
Software - Application · market cap $5.9b. Down 35% from 52-week high of $153.68 — deep drawdown territory. PEG 0.75 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 13 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $125.85 (implying +26% upside).
Moat
Net margin 21% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 16% sits above Buffett's preferred 15% threshold — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 114% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Down 35% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Software — competitive moat is durable until it isn't; watch net revenue retention, gross margin trends, and any new market entrant with a fundamentally lower price point.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
ADSK leads NICE by 0.9 points (84.8 to 83.9), its sharpest advantage coming in FCF (grade B). A contrarian could still prefer NICE, which trades about 54% below our DCF fair value — a margin of safety the score doesn't reward. Note they play different roles — ADSK screens as growth, NICE 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 ADSK and NICE diverge
The two are effectively level on the headline score. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- ValueADSK 73.4 · NICE 87.4NICE +14.0
- GrowthADSK 85.9 · NICE 76.0ADSK +9.9
- QualityADSK 87.9 · NICE 83.7ADSK +4.2
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.