Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. SPOT scored 54.9, GOOGL scored 79.5 — GOOGL leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. GOOGL's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but SPOT's are as of December 2025 — a 6-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
SPOT
Spotify Technology S.A.
Internet Content & Information · Quality-Growth
54.9
$529.14 · $108.8B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
24.6
GOOGL leads
GOOGL
Alphabet Inc.
Internet Content & Information · Quality-Growth
79.5
$351.66 · $4.3T
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestGOOGL17.6x
Fastest growthGOOGL+20.1%
Strongest balance sheetSPOT0.06
Highest qualityGOOGL84 / 100
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)
SPOT
stronger →← stronger
GOOGL
76
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
84
80
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
91
32
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
66
GOOGL is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
SPOT
GOOGL
$3.7bB
FCF
$53.3bA
+9.7%B
Rev
+20.1%A-
0.06A
D/E
0.19A-
30.4xC+
P/E
17.6xB
1.49B
PEG
1.22B
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
SPOT
GOOGL
124% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
349% above
~34%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~54%/yr
-62%
1-yr DCF upside
-82%
-55%
5-yr DCF upside
-78%
-44%
10-yr DCF upside
-70%
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
SPOT
Why this score
Foreign reporter (EUR)
GOOGL
Why this score
Durable high returns
The companies
SPOTSpotify Technology S.A.
Internet Content & Information · $529.14 · beta 1.61
Why now
Internet Content & Information · market cap $108.8b. Down 24% from 52-week high of $700.12 — deep drawdown territory. 38 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $593.99 (implying +12% upside).
Moat
Net margin 13% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 27% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 98% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Beta 1.61 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. Trailing P/E 30x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
GOOGLAlphabet Inc.
Internet Content & Information · $351.66 · beta 1.21
Why now
Internet Content & Information · market cap $4.3T. 14% off the 52-week high of $408.61. Revenue growing +20%, comfortably above the S&P median. 54 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $429.47 (implying +22% upside).
Moat
Net margin 55% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 38% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. $4.3T market cap places it among the largest companies in the sector — distribution, R&D, and customer-acquisition costs amortize across a base peers can't replicate.
Risk
Mature compounder — the risk is paying up for quality at a moment when growth is decelerating. Watch for sequential revenue + margin trends; the inflection from "compounder" to "ex-compounder" is hard to spot until the multiple already started compressing.
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 SPOT and GOOGL diverge
On the headline score the gap is 24.6 points in favor of GOOGL. The widest single difference is Value, where GOOGL leads by 34.0 points.
ValueSPOT 31.8 · GOOGL 65.8GOOGL +34.0
GrowthSPOT 79.7 · GOOGL 90.5GOOGL +10.8
QualitySPOT 76.0 · GOOGL 84.4GOOGL +8.4
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 GOOGL or SPOT the better stock?
GOOGL scores higher: GOOGL 79.5, SPOT 54.9 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 GOOGL and SPOT differ most?
The widest gap is value, where GOOGL leads by 34 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. GOOGL leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are GOOGL and SPOT 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.