COMPARE · Data as of August 27, 2026
APP vs TTD
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. APP scored 83.7, TTD scored 80.7 — APP leads.
Compare another set
APP
AppLovin Corporation
83.7
$312.63 · $105.0B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
3.0
APP leads
TTD
The Trade Desk, Inc.
80.7
$13.42 · $6.3B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestTTD16.0x
- Fastest growthAPP+60.6%
- Strongest balance sheetTTD0.17
- Highest qualityAPP90 / 100
- Largest discount to fair valueTTD-38%
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)
APP
stronger →← stronger
TTD
90
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
86
96
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
84
68
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
73
APP is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
APP
TTD
$4.5bB
FCF
$863mC+
+60.6%A
Rev
+11.6%B
1.11C+
D/E
0.17A-
24.0xB
P/E
16.0xB+
0.88B+
PEG
1.12B+
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
APP
TTD
1% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
38% below
~14%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-13%/yr
-23%
1-yr DCF upside
+80%
+1%
5-yr DCF upside
+62%
+51%
10-yr DCF upside
+40%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
APP
Why this score
- Durable high returns
TTD
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
APPAppLovin Corporation
Why now
Advertising Agencies · market cap $105.0b. Down 58% from 52-week high of $745.61 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +61% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.88 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 31 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $525.58 (implying +68% upside).
Moat
Net margin 65% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. FCF converts 103% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined. $105.0b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
Risk
Down 58% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 2.53 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. P/S 15.4x embeds aggressive forward growth — disappointing top-line guidance would compress the multiple hard.
TTDThe Trade Desk, Inc.
Why now
Advertising Agencies · market cap $6.3b. Down 76% from 52-week high of $56.39 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +12%, comfortably above the S&P median. 30 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $13.39 (implying -0% upside).
Moat
Net margin 14% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 16% sits above Buffett's preferred 15% threshold — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income — non-cash charges (depreciation, intangible amortization) are holding down GAAP earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
Down 76% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Ad-spending cyclicality — marketing budgets are among the first cut in any recession and the last restored; the business levers higher in the bull but lower in the bear than the headline economy.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
The model favors TTD (score 85.4) over APP (score 80) primarily due to its superior Value pillar of 77, significantly higher than APP's 59. However, a contrarian might prefer APP for its significantly higher revenue growth of +66.4% (A grade), despite its richer valuation.
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 APP and TTD diverge
On the headline score the gap is 3.0 points in favor of APP. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- GrowthAPP 96.1 · TTD 83.8APP +12.3
- ValueAPP 67.6 · TTD 73.2TTD +5.6
- QualityAPP 90.3 · TTD 85.6APP +4.7
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.