Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. QLYS scored 71.8, S scored 29.5 — QLYS leads.
Compare another set
QLYS
Qualys, Inc.
Software - Infrastructure · Quality-Growth
71.8
$202.42 · $7.0B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
42.3
QLYS leads
S
SentinelOne, Inc.
Software - Infrastructure · Quality-Growth
29.5
$26.27 · $9.1B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Fastest growthS+21.1%
Strongest balance sheetS0.00
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
S
95
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
31
74
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
90
53
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
9
QLYS is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
QLYS
S
$314mC
FCF
$57mC-
+10.4%B
Rev
+21.1%A-
0.09B+
D/E
0.00A
35.1xB
P/E
—
3.33D
PEG
—
—
P/S
8.3xC+
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
S
11% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
433% above
~5%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
>60%/yr
+3%
1-yr DCF upside
-86%
+12%
5-yr DCF upside
-81%
+28%
10-yr DCF upside
-72%
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
S
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
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.
SSentinelOne, Inc.
Software - Infrastructure · $26.27 · beta 0.71
Why now
Software - Infrastructure · market cap $9.1b. Trading near 52-week high of $26.50 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. Revenue growing +21%, comfortably above the S&P median. 30 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $24.48 (implying -7% 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 -31.0%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk. Trading within 1% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. ROE -23% 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.
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 S diverge
On the headline score the gap is 42.3 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.
QualityQLYS 95.2 · S 30.9QLYS +64.3
ValueQLYS 52.9 · S 9.2QLYS +43.7
GrowthQLYS 73.6 · S 90.4S +16.8
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 QLYS or S the better stock?
QLYS scores higher: QLYS 71.8, S 29.5 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 S differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where QLYS leads by 64 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 S 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.