COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
FTNT vs QLYS
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. FTNT scored 63.1, QLYS scored 71.0 — QLYS leads.
Compare another set
FTNT
Fortinet, Inc.
63.1
$152.68 · $112.0B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
7.9
QLYS leads
QLYS
Qualys, Inc.
71
$181.98 · $6.3B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestQLYS31.5x
- Fastest growthFTNT+18.8%
- Strongest balance sheetQLYS0.09
- Highest qualityQLYS95 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueQLYS-19%
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)
FTNT
stronger →← stronger
QLYS
92
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
95
93
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
83
30
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
45
QLYS is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
FTNT
QLYS
$3.1bB
FCF
$314mC
+18.8%B+
Rev
+10.4%B
0.36B
D/E
0.09B+
54.1xC
P/E
31.5xB
2.10C
PEG
3.64D
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
FTNT
QLYS
124% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
19% below
~27%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~1%/yr
-59%
1-yr DCF upside
+15%
-55%
5-yr DCF upside
+23%
-50%
10-yr DCF upside
+36%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
FTNT
Why this score
- Buying back stock
- Durable high returns
QLYS
Why this score
- Buying back stock
- Durable high returns
The companies
FTNTFortinet, Inc.
Why now
Software - Infrastructure · market cap $112.0b. 11% off the 52-week high of $172.09. Revenue growing +19%, comfortably above the S&P median. 37 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $160.86 (implying +5% upside).
Moat
Net margin 28% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. FCF converts 147% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined. $112.0b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
Risk
Trailing P/E 54.1x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. P/S 14.9x embeds aggressive forward growth — disappointing top-line guidance would compress the multiple hard. Software — competitive moat is durable until it isn't; watch net revenue retention, gross margin trends, and any new market entrant with a fundamentally lower price point.
QLYSQualys, Inc.
Why now
Software - Infrastructure · market cap $6.3b. 10% off the 52-week high of $201.54. Revenue growing +10%, comfortably above the S&P median. 18 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $171.74 (implying -6% upside).
Moat
Net margin 29% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 37% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 152% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Trailing P/E 32x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. Software — competitive moat is durable until it isn't; watch net revenue retention, gross margin trends, and any new market entrant with a fundamentally lower price point.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
QLYS leads FTNT by 8.1 points (71.0 to 62.9), its sharpest advantage coming in P/E (grade B). A contrarian could still prefer FTNT for its stronger FCF (grade B).
Our AI analyst is busy right now, so this verdict is drawn directly from the pillars, grades and DCF above.
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 FTNT and QLYS diverge
On the headline score the gap is 7.9 points in favor of QLYS. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- ValueFTNT 29.6 · QLYS 45.3QLYS +15.7
- GrowthFTNT 92.6 · QLYS 82.9FTNT +9.7
- QualityFTNT 91.8 · QLYS 95.4QLYS +3.6
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.