Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. TENB scored 56.5, QLYS scored 71.8 — QLYS leads.
Compare another set
TENB
Tenable Holdings, Inc.
Software - Infrastructure · Quality-Growth
56.5
$41.59 · $4.6B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
15.3
QLYS leads
QLYS
Qualys, Inc.
Software - Infrastructure · Quality-Growth
71.8
$202.42 · $7.0B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
Fastest growthQLYS+10.4%
Strongest balance sheetQLYS0.09
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)
TENB
stronger →← stronger
QLYS
63
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
95
72
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
74
40
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
53
QLYS is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
TENB
QLYS
$264mC
FCF
$314mC
+9.9%B
Rev
+10.4%B
2.12D
D/E
0.09B+
4.4xB
P/S
—
1.33B
PEG
3.33D
—
P/E
35.1xB
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
TENB
QLYS
2% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
11% below
~8%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~5%/yr
-10%
1-yr DCF upside
+3%
-2%
5-yr DCF upside
+12%
+10%
10-yr DCF upside
+28%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
TENB
Why this score
Buying back stock
QLYS
Why this score
Buying back stock
Durable high returns
The companies
TENBTenable Holdings, Inc.
Software - Infrastructure · $41.59 · beta 1.01
Why now
Software - Infrastructure · market cap $4.6b. 5% off the 52-week high of $43.67. 20 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $35.35 (implying -15% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income, mostly because of stock-based pay ($180m) — a real cost to shareholders, paid in shares rather than cash. 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
D/E 2.12 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Net margin 0.6% is thin — operating leverage cuts both ways; input-cost inflation or pricing pressure hits the bottom line first. ROE 3% 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.
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.
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 TENB and QLYS diverge
On the headline score the gap is 15.3 points in favor of QLYS. The widest single difference is Quality, where QLYS leads by 32.1 points.
QualityTENB 63.1 · QLYS 95.2QLYS +32.1
ValueTENB 39.7 · QLYS 52.9QLYS +13.2
GrowthTENB 71.7 · QLYS 73.6level
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 TENB the better stock?
QLYS scores higher: QLYS 71.8, TENB 56.5 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 TENB differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where QLYS leads by 32 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. QLYS also leads value, while growth is effectively level between them.
How are QLYS and TENB 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.