Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. TENB scored 56.5, RBRK scored 39.6 — TENB leads.
Compare another set
TENB
Tenable Holdings, Inc.
Software - Infrastructure · Quality-Growth
56.5
$41.59 · $4.6B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
16.9
TENB 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
CheapestTENB4.4x
Fastest growthRBRK+42.4%
Highest qualityTENB63 / 100
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/S 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)
TENB
stronger →← stronger
RBRK
63
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
58
72
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
96
40
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
11
TENB is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
TENB
RBRK
$264mC
FCF
$304mC
+9.9%B
Rev
+42.4%A
2.12D
D/E
Negative equity
4.4xB
P/S
16.7xC
1.33B
PEG
—
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
RBRK
2% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
300% above
~8%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~53%/yr
-10%
1-yr DCF upside
-81%
-2%
5-yr DCF upside
-75%
+10%
10-yr DCF upside
-63%
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
RBRK
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
Short track record
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.
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 TENB and RBRK diverge
On the headline score the gap is 16.9 points in favor of TENB. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
ValueTENB 39.7 · RBRK 11.1TENB +28.6
GrowthTENB 71.7 · RBRK 96.0RBRK +24.3
QualityTENB 63.1 · RBRK 58.2TENB +4.9
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 TENB or RBRK the better stock?
TENB scores higher: TENB 56.5, 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 TENB and RBRK differ most?
The widest gap is value, where TENB leads by 29 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 TENB 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.