COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026
CPAY vs TOST
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. CPAY scored 78.8, TOST scored 76.3 — CPAY leads.
Compare another set
CPAY
Corpay, Inc.
78.8
$417.13 · $27.4B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
2.5
CPAY leads
TOST
Toast, Inc.
76.3
$36.64 · $21.2B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestCPAY25.4x
- Fastest growthTOST+23.0%
- Highest qualityCPAY88 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueCPAY-20%
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)
CPAY
stronger →← stronger
TOST
88
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
68
92
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
91
60
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
72
CPAY is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
CPAY
TOST
$1.6bC+
FCF
$576mC+
+20.4%A-
Rev
+23.0%A-
2.75D
D/E
—
25.4xB+
P/E
46.4xC+
0.93B+
PEG
0.23A
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
CPAY
TOST
20% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
150% above
~3%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~41%/yr
+9%
1-yr DCF upside
-69%
+26%
5-yr DCF upside
-60%
+55%
10-yr DCF upside
-43%
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
CPAY
Why this score
- Buying back stock
- Durable high returns
TOST
Why this score
- Diluting shareholders
The companies
CPAYCorpay, Inc.
Why now
Software - Infrastructure · market cap $27.4b. Trading near 52-week high of $425.95 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. Revenue growing +20%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.93 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 14 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $450.64 (implying +8% upside).
Moat
Net margin 23% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 32% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 144% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
D/E 2.75 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Trading within 2% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. 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.
TOSTToast, Inc.
Why now
Software - Infrastructure · market cap $21.2b. 20% off the 52-week high of $45.64. Revenue growing +23%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.23 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 26 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $38.62 (implying +5% upside).
Moat
ROE 24% sits above Buffett's preferred 15% threshold — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 119% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined. 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
Beta 1.73 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 46x 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 CPAY and TOST diverge
On the headline score the gap is 2.5 points in favor of CPAY. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- QualityCPAY 88.3 · TOST 67.7CPAY +20.6
- ValueCPAY 60.4 · TOST 72.1TOST +11.7
- GrowthCPAY 91.9 · TOST 91.1level
Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a 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.