COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
MGNI vs OMC
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. MGNI scored 71.9, OMC scored 41.8 — MGNI leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. MGNI's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but OMC'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.
MGNI
Magnite, Inc.
71.9
$23.50 · $3.4B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
30.1
MGNI leads
OMC
Omnicom Group Inc.
41.8
$87.54 · $24.0B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- Fastest growthOMC+25.9%
- Strongest balance sheetMGNI0.45
- Highest qualityMGNI67 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueOMC-69%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
MGNI
stronger →← stronger
OMC
67
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
44
75
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
77
74
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
22
MGNI is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
MGNI
OMC
$216mC
FCF
$3.0bB
+8.3%B
Rev
+25.9%A-
0.45B+
D/E
1.08C+
21.4xB
P/E
—
0.09A
PEG
15.97D
—
P/S
1.2xA-
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
MGNI
OMC
36% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
69% below
~19%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-17%/yr
-38%
1-yr DCF upside
+176%
-27%
5-yr DCF upside
+217%
-9%
10-yr DCF upside
+291%
These two disagree on this pair: the Value pillar ranks cheapness against sector peers, while price-vs-fair-value is an absolute read. A name can be the better value in its sector and still the dearer one on cash flows.
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
MGNI
No notable signals flagged.
OMC
Why this score
- Raising its dividend
- Diluting shareholders
The companies
MGNIMagnite, Inc.
Why now
Advertising Agencies · market cap $3.4b. 12% off the 52-week high of $26.65. PEG 0.09 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 15 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $27.33 (implying +16% upside).
Moat
Net margin 22% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 18% sits above Buffett's preferred 15% threshold — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 129% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Beta 2.27 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. Platform dependency — much of the addressable ad budget flows through Google, Meta, and Amazon; an algorithm change or pricing shift on the platform side resets the economics overnight.
OMCOmnicom Group Inc.
Why now
Advertising Agencies · market cap $24.0b. Trading near 52-week high of $88.55 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. Revenue growing +26% — in hypergrowth territory. 12 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $102.08 (implying +17% upside).
Moat
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
Trading within 1% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. Net margin 0.3% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first. ROE 1% is below the long-run sustainable threshold of ~10% — capital efficiency would need to improve for the equity base to compound at the market rate.
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 MGNI and OMC diverge
On the headline score the gap is 30.1 points in favor of MGNI. The widest single difference is Value, where MGNI leads by 52.1 points.
- ValueMGNI 73.7 · OMC 21.6MGNI +52.1
- QualityMGNI 67.4 · OMC 43.7MGNI +23.7
- GrowthMGNI 74.9 · OMC 77.4level
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.