Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. OUST scored 21.4, CLS scored 68.4 — CLS leads.
Compare another set
OUST
Ouster, Inc.
Electronic Components · Quality-Growth
21.4
$39.90 · $2.9B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
47.0
CLS leads
CLS
Celestica Inc.
Electronic Components · Quality-Growth
68.4
$362.16 · $45.7B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Fastest growthOUST+62.8%
Strongest balance sheetOUST0.04
Highest qualityCLS74 / 100
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
OUST
stronger →← stronger
CLS
15
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
74
99
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
95
6
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
45
CLS is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
OUST
CLS
-$82mF
FCF
$519mC+
+62.8%A
Rev
+28.5%A-
0.04A-
D/E
0.40B
14.0xC
P/S
—
—
PEG
1.00B+
—
P/E
37.6xB
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
OUST
CLS
—
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
376% above
—
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~60%/yr
—
1-yr DCF upside
-84%
—
5-yr DCF upside
-79%
—
10-yr DCF upside
-70%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
OUST
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
CLS
Why this score
Durable high returns
The companies
OUSTOuster, Inc.
Electronic Components · $39.90 · beta 3.23
Why now
Electronic Components · market cap $2.9b. Down 37% from 52-week high of $63.79 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +63% — in hypergrowth territory. 5 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $59.40 (implying +49% upside).
Moat
Turnaround / out-of-favor name — GAAP-unprofitable for now, so the durability case is forward-looking: it rests on a recovery (margin normalization, a cyclical upturn or restructuring) or an un-monetized asset (IP / network effects / first-mover position) rather than on current reported results.
Risk
Free cash flow is negative (-$82m) — capital raises or debt issuance likely required; dilution / leverage risk. Currently unprofitable (margin -26.0%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk. Down 37% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
CLSCelestica Inc.
Electronic Components · $362.16 · beta 1.32
Why now
Electronic Components · market cap $45.7b. Down 24% from 52-week high of $474.03 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +28% — in hypergrowth territory. 18 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $473.91 (implying +31% upside).
Moat
ROE 53% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which.
Risk
Trailing P/E 38x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
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 OUST and CLS diverge
On the headline score the gap is 47.0 points in favor of CLS. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
QualityOUST 15.3 · CLS 74.4CLS +59.1
ValueOUST 6.5 · CLS 45.5CLS +39.0
GrowthOUST 98.5 · CLS 94.7OUST +3.8
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 CLS or OUST the better stock?
CLS scores higher: CLS 68.4, OUST 21.4 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 CLS and OUST differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where CLS leads by 59 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 CLS and OUST 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.