Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. OPRA scored 74.5, GOOG scored 80.4 — GOOG leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. GOOG's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but OPRA's are as of December 2025 — a 6-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
OPRA
Opera Limited
Internet Content & Information · Quality-Growth
74.5
$17.58 · $1.6B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
5.9
GOOG leads
GOOG
Alphabet Inc.
Internet Content & Information · Quality-Growth
80.4
$347.86 · $4.3T
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestOPRA12.1x
Fastest growthOPRA+27.9%
Strongest balance sheetOPRA0.01
Highest qualityGOOG84 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueOPRA-30%
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)
OPRA
stronger →← stronger
GOOG
69
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
84
95
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
91
63
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
68
GOOG is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
OPRA
GOOG
$112mC
FCF
$53.3bA
+27.9%A-
Rev
+20.1%A-
0.01A
D/E
0.19A-
12.1xB+
P/E
17.5xB
0.55A-
PEG
1.21B
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
OPRA
GOOG
30% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
344% above
~6%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~54%/yr
+11%
1-yr DCF upside
-82%
+43%
5-yr DCF upside
-77%
+108%
10-yr DCF upside
-70%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
OPRA
Why this score
Cut its dividend
GOOG
Why this score
Durable high returns
The companies
OPRAOpera Limited
Internet Content & Information · $17.58 · beta 1.20
Why now
Internet Content & Information · market cap $1.6b. 15% off the 52-week high of $20.78. Revenue growing +28% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.55 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 7 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $26.29 (implying +50% upside).
Moat
Net margin 18% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 11% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 104% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Dividend payout 86% of earnings on a 4.8% yield — distribution coverage is thin; one earnings stumble could force a dividend cut.
GOOGAlphabet Inc.
Internet Content & Information · $347.86 · beta 1.21
Why now
Internet Content & Information · market cap $4.3T. 14% off the 52-week high of $404.47. Revenue growing +20%, comfortably above the S&P median. 14 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $420.36 (implying +21% upside).
Moat
Net margin 55% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 38% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. $4.3T market cap places it among the largest companies in the sector — distribution, R&D, and customer-acquisition costs amortize across a base peers can't replicate.
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.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
The model favors GOOG (80.4) over OPRA (74.5) primarily due to GOOG's superior Quality pillar score of 84 versus OPRA's 69, reflecting its durable high returns. A contrarian might prefer OPRA, which trades 30% below our DCF fair value and implies only 6% annual growth, despite the model flagging that it cut its dividend.
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 OPRA and GOOG diverge
On the headline score the gap is 5.9 points in favor of GOOG. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
QualityOPRA 68.9 · GOOG 84.4GOOG +15.5
GrowthOPRA 95.4 · GOOG 90.5OPRA +4.9
ValueOPRA 63.0 · GOOG 67.9GOOG +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 GOOG or OPRA the better stock?
GOOG scores higher: GOOG 80.4, OPRA 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 GOOG and OPRA differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where GOOG leads by 16 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 GOOG and OPRA 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.