COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026

HQY vs VEEV

Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. HQY scored 66.5, VEEV scored 77.8 — VEEV leads.
Compare another set
HQY
HealthEquity, Inc.
Health Information Services · Quality-Growth
66.5
$105.41 · $8.8B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
11.3
VEEV leads
VEEV
Veeva Systems Inc.
Health Information Services · Quality-Growth
77.8
$247.90 · $40.3B
fundamentals as of
  • CheapestHQY39.5x
  • Fastest growthVEEV+16.2%
  • Strongest balance sheetVEEV0.01
  • Highest qualityVEEV77 / 100
  • Largest discount to fair valueHQY-6%
THE BULL RANKINGS SCORECARD66.5/ 100 · BULL SCOREPEER MEDIANQUALITY70.6GROWTH62.3VALUE66.9
THE BULL RANKINGS SCORECARD77.8/ 100 · BULL SCOREPEER MEDIANQUALITY77.3GROWTH90.6VALUE67.4
HQYVEEVQuality70.677.3Growth62.390.6Value66.967.4
cheap & fastrevenue growth →← cheaper (lower multiple)-2%26%34x49xHQYVEEV

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.

FCFHQY$488mVEEV$1.7b
RevHQY+7.6%VEEV+16.2%
D/EHQY0.48VEEV0.01
P/EHQY39.5xVEEV43.9x
PEGHQY1.35VEEV1.13
HQY
stronger →← stronger
VEEV
71
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
77
62
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
91
67
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
67
VEEV is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
HQY
VEEV
$488mC
FCF
$1.7bC+
+7.6%B
Rev
+16.2%B+
0.48B
D/E
0.01A-
39.5xC+
P/E
43.9xC
1.35B
PEG
1.13B+
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.
HQY
VEEV
6% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
30% above
~8%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~14%/yr
-9%
1-yr DCF upside
-30%
+7%
5-yr DCF upside
-23%
+34%
10-yr DCF upside
-11%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
HQY
Why this score
  • Buying back stock
VEEV
No notable signals flagged.
HQYHealthEquity, Inc.
Health Information Services · $105.41 · beta 0.23
Why now
Health Information Services · market cap $8.8b. Trading near 52-week high of $107.62 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. 15 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $118.53 (implying +12% upside).
Moat
Net margin 17% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 11% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. 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
Trading within 2% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. Trailing P/E 39x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
VEEVVeeva Systems Inc.
Health Information Services · $247.90 · beta 0.92
Why now
Health Information Services · market cap $40.3b. Down 20% from 52-week high of $310.50 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +16%, comfortably above the S&P median. 28 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $251.43 (implying +1% upside).
Moat
Net margin 28% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 13% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 177% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Trailing P/E 44x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. P/S 12.1x embeds aggressive forward growth — disappointing top-line guidance would compress the multiple hard.
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 HQY and VEEV diverge

On the headline score the gap is 11.3 points in favor of VEEV. The widest single difference is Growth, where VEEV leads by 28.3 points.

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.