Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. QLYS scored 71.8, RBRK scored 39.6 — QLYS leads.
Compare another set
QLYS
Qualys, Inc.
Software - Infrastructure · Quality-Growth
71.8
$202.42 · $7.0B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
32.2
QLYS leads
RBRK
Rubrik, Inc.
Software - Infrastructure · Quality-Growth
39.6
$125.14 · $25.8B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Fastest growthRBRK+42.4%
Highest qualityQLYS95 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueQLYS-11%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
QLYS
stronger →← stronger
RBRK
95
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
58
74
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
96
53
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
11
QLYS is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
QLYS
RBRK
$314mC
FCF
$304mC
+10.4%B
Rev
+42.4%A
0.09B+
D/E
Negative equity
35.1xB
P/E
—
3.33D
PEG
—
—
P/S
16.7xC
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
QLYS
RBRK
11% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
300% above
~5%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~53%/yr
+3%
1-yr DCF upside
-81%
+12%
5-yr DCF upside
-75%
+28%
10-yr DCF upside
-63%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
QLYS
Why this score
Buying back stock
Durable high returns
RBRK
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
Short track record
The companies
QLYSQualys, Inc.
Software - Infrastructure · $202.42 · beta 0.60
Why now
Software - Infrastructure · market cap $7.0b. Trading near 52-week high of $204.41 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. Revenue growing +10%, comfortably above the S&P median. 18 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $179.36 (implying -11% 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.
Risk
Trading within 1% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. Trailing P/E 35x 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.
RBRKRubrik, Inc.
Software - Infrastructure · $125.14 · beta 1.12
Why now
Software - Infrastructure · market cap $25.8b. Trading near 52-week high of $127.90 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. Revenue growing +42% — in hypergrowth territory. 27 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $120.15 (implying -4% upside).
Moat
Software economics — recurring revenue, embedded customer workflows, and high gross margin all compound the moat once a base account is won. Switching costs are the lever.
Risk
Currently unprofitable (margin -16.5%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk. Trading within 2% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. P/S 16.7x embeds aggressive forward growth — disappointing top-line guidance would compress the multiple hard.
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 QLYS and RBRK diverge
On the headline score the gap is 32.2 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.
ValueQLYS 52.9 · RBRK 11.1QLYS +41.8
QualityQLYS 95.2 · RBRK 58.2QLYS +37.0
GrowthQLYS 73.6 · RBRK 96.0RBRK +22.4
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 QLYS or RBRK the better stock?
QLYS scores higher: QLYS 71.8, RBRK 39.6 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 QLYS and RBRK differ most?
The widest gap is value, where QLYS leads by 42 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 QLYS and RBRK 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.