Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. TENB scored 56.5, ZS scored 36.0 — TENB leads.
Compare another set
TENB
Tenable Holdings, Inc.
Software - Infrastructure · Quality-Growth
56.5
$41.59 · $4.6B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
20.5
TENB leads
ZS
Zscaler, Inc.
Software - Infrastructure · Quality-Growth
36
$233.73 · $38.1B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestTENB4.4x
Fastest growthZS+25.4%
Strongest balance sheetZS0.72
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
ZS
63
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
36
72
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
92
40
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
14
TENB is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
TENB
ZS
$264mC
FCF
$852mC+
+9.9%B
Rev
+25.4%A-
2.12D
D/E
0.72C+
4.4xB
P/S
11.4xC
1.33B
PEG
2.22C
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
ZS
2% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
83% above
~8%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~31%/yr
-10%
1-yr DCF upside
-58%
-2%
5-yr DCF upside
-45%
+10%
10-yr DCF upside
-19%
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
ZS
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
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.
ZSZscaler, Inc.
Software - Infrastructure · $233.73 · beta 0.94
Why now
Software - Infrastructure · market cap $38.1b. Down 31% from 52-week high of $336.99 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +25% — in hypergrowth territory. 44 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $233.38 (implying -0% 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 -1.9%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk. Down 31% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. P/S 11.4x 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 ZS diverge
On the headline score the gap is 20.5 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.
QualityTENB 63.1 · ZS 35.9TENB +27.2
ValueTENB 39.7 · ZS 14.1TENB +25.6
GrowthTENB 71.7 · ZS 91.9ZS +20.2
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 ZS the better stock?
TENB scores higher: TENB 56.5, ZS 36.0 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 ZS differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where TENB leads by 27 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 ZS 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.