Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. STGW scored 40.8, MGNI scored 58.7 — MGNI leads.
Compare another set
STGW
Stagwell Inc.
Advertising Agencies · Quality-Growth
40.8
$8.65 · $2.1B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
17.9
MGNI leads
MGNI
Magnite, Inc.
Advertising Agencies · Quality-Growth
58.7
$25.40 · $3.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestMGNI23.1x
Fastest growthMGNI+6.9%
Strongest balance sheetMGNI0.45
Highest qualityMGNI67 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueSTGW-44%
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)
STGW
stronger →← stronger
MGNI
51
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
67
70
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
73
19
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
42
MGNI is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
STGW
MGNI
$253mC
FCF
$200mC
+6.4%C+
Rev
+6.9%C+
2.41C
D/E
0.45B+
173.0xD
P/E
23.1xB
0.38A
PEG
0.09A
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
STGW
MGNI
44% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
41% above
~-5%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~22%/yr
+57%
1-yr DCF upside
-41%
+79%
5-yr DCF upside
-29%
+114%
10-yr DCF upside
-8%
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
STGW
Why this score
Buying back stock
MGNI
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
STGWStagwell Inc.
Advertising Agencies · $8.65 · beta 1.30
Why now
Advertising Agencies · market cap $2.1b. 9% off the 52-week high of $9.55. PEG 0.38 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 7 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $10.71 (implying +24% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income.
Risk
D/E 2.41 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Trailing P/E 173.0x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Net margin 0.5% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first.
MGNIMagnite, Inc.
Advertising Agencies · $25.40 · beta 2.32
Why now
Advertising Agencies · market cap $3.6b. 5% off the 52-week high of $26.84. PEG 0.09 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 15 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $29.67 (implying +17% upside).
Moat
Net margin 22% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 20% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 120% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Beta 2.32 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. Platform dependency — much of the addressable ad budget flows through Google, Meta, and Amazon; an algorithm change or pricing shift on the platform side resets the economics overnight.
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 STGW and MGNI diverge
On the headline score the gap is 17.9 points in favor of MGNI. The widest single difference is Value, where MGNI leads by 22.4 points.
ValueSTGW 19.1 · MGNI 41.5MGNI +22.4
QualitySTGW 50.5 · MGNI 66.5MGNI +16.0
GrowthSTGW 70.3 · MGNI 73.2level
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 MGNI or STGW the better stock?
MGNI scores higher: MGNI 58.7, STGW 40.8 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 MGNI and STGW differ most?
The widest gap is value, where MGNI leads by 22 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. MGNI also leads quality, while growth is effectively level between them.
How are MGNI and STGW 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.