Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. PRVA scored 56.0, DOCS scored 70.8 — DOCS leads.
Compare another set
PRVA
Privia Health Group, Inc.
Health Information Services · Quality-Growth
56
$20.85 · $2.7B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
14.8
DOCS leads
DOCS
Doximity, Inc.
Health Information Services · Quality-Growth
70.8
$30.50 · $5.4B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestDOCS35.9x
Fastest growthPRVA+24.1%
Strongest balance sheetPRVA0.01
Highest qualityDOCS88 / 100
Largest discount to fair valuePRVA-20%
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)
PRVA
stronger →← stronger
DOCS
44
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
88
79
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
70
50
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
58
DOCS is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
PRVA
DOCS
$131mC
FCF
$297mC
+24.1%A-
Rev
+13.1%B+
0.01A-
D/E
0.01A-
99.3xD
P/E
35.9xC+
27.41D
PEG
0.59A-
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
PRVA
DOCS
20% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
18% above
~7%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~13%/yr
+1%
1-yr DCF upside
-25%
+25%
5-yr DCF upside
-15%
+74%
10-yr DCF upside
0%
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
PRVA
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
DOCS
Why this score
Durable high returns
The companies
PRVAPrivia Health Group, Inc.
Health Information Services · $20.85 · beta 0.80
Why now
Health Information Services · market cap $2.7b. Down 28% from 52-week high of $28.82 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +24%, comfortably above the S&P median. 17 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $31.47 (implying +51% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income, mostly because of stock-based pay ($76m) — a real cost to shareholders, paid in shares rather than cash.
Risk
Trailing P/E 99.3x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Net margin 1.2% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first. ROE 4% 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.
DOCSDoximity, Inc.
Health Information Services · $30.50 · beta 1.22
Why now
Health Information Services · market cap $5.4b. Down 58% from 52-week high of $72.24 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +13%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.59 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 18 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $29.67 (implying -3% upside).
Moat
Net margin 25% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 17% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 178% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Down 58% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Trailing P/E 36x 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 PRVA and DOCS diverge
On the headline score the gap is 14.8 points in favor of DOCS. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
QualityPRVA 44.2 · DOCS 87.5DOCS +43.3
GrowthPRVA 78.7 · DOCS 69.7PRVA +9.0
ValuePRVA 50.4 · DOCS 58.2DOCS +7.8
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 DOCS or PRVA the better stock?
DOCS scores higher: DOCS 70.8, PRVA 56.0 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 DOCS and PRVA differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where DOCS leads by 43 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 DOCS and PRVA 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.