COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
META vs OPRA
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. META scored 79.1, OPRA scored 73.1 — META leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. META'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.
META
Meta Platforms, Inc.
79.1
$545.83 · $1.4T
fundamentals as of
Score gap
6.0
META leads
OPRA
Opera Limited
73.1
$18.29 · $1.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestOPRA13.3x
- Fastest growthOPRA+27.9%
- Strongest balance sheetOPRA0.01
- Highest qualityMETA86 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueOPRA-37%
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)
META
stronger →← stronger
OPRA
86
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
69
92
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
95
62
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
59
META is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
META
OPRA
$41.0bA
FCF
$112mC
+27.7%A-
Rev
+27.9%A-
0.43B+
D/E
0.01A
20.6xB
P/E
13.3xB+
0.82B+
PEG
0.54A-
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
META
OPRA
129% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
37% below
~29%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~3%/yr
-61%
1-yr DCF upside
+22%
-56%
5-yr DCF upside
+59%
-49%
10-yr DCF upside
+136%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
META
Why this score
- Durable high returns
OPRA
Why this score
- Cut its dividend
The companies
METAMeta Platforms, Inc.
Why now
Internet Content & Information · market cap $1.4T. Down 31% from 52-week high of $790.80 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +28% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.82 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 57 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $754.14 (implying +38% upside).
Moat
Net margin 30% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 26% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. $1.4T 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
Down 31% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
OPRAOpera Limited
Why now
Internet Content & Information · market cap $1.6b. 13% off the 52-week high of $21.06. Revenue growing +28% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.54 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 7 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $26.29 (implying +44% 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, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Dividend payout 87% of earnings on a 4.4% yield — distribution coverage is thin; one earnings stumble could force a dividend cut.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
The model favors META (78.1) over OPRA (71.5) primarily due to META's superior Quality pillar score of 86 versus OPRA's 69. A contrarian, however, might prefer OPRA for its -37% discount to DCF fair value and a low 3% implied growth rate. A caveat for OPRA is its "Cut its dividend" signal.
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 META and OPRA diverge
On the headline score the gap is 6.0 points in favor of META. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- QualityMETA 86.4 · OPRA 69.3META +17.1
- GrowthMETA 92.4 · OPRA 95.4OPRA +3.0
- ValueMETA 61.8 · OPRA 59.0level
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.