Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. VSNT scored 64.8, NFLX scored 81.2 — NFLX leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. NFLX's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but VSNT's are as of December 2025 — a 6-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
VSNT
Versant Media Group, Inc.
Entertainment · Quality-Growth
64.8
$30.64 · $4.3B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
16.4
NFLX leads
NFLX
Netflix, Inc.
Entertainment · Quality-Growth
81.2
$70.30 · $292.7B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestVSNT5.8x
Fastest growthNFLX+16.0%
Strongest balance sheetVSNT0.39
Highest qualityNFLX92 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueVSNT-81%
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)
VSNT
stronger →← stronger
NFLX
76
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
92
41
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
89
87
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
65
NFLX is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
VSNT
NFLX
$1.9bC+
FCF
$11.2bA-
-5.3%D
Rev
+16.0%B+
0.39B+
D/E
0.55B+
5.8xA
P/E
22.1xB
0.64A-
PEG
1.22B
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
VSNT
NFLX
81% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
117% above
decline
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~30%/yr
+490%
1-yr DCF upside
-59%
+426%
5-yr DCF upside
-54%
+348%
10-yr DCF upside
-47%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
VSNT
Why this score
Short track record
NFLX
Why this score
Durable high returns
The companies
VSNTVersant Media Group, Inc.
Entertainment · $30.64
Why now
Entertainment · market cap $4.3b. Down 48% from 52-week high of $59.00 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue -5% — in contraction; any catalyst that reverses this triggers re-rating. PEG 0.64 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 7 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $44.57 (implying +45% 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 11% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 199% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Revenue contracting -5% — the operational turn is not yet visible in the top line. Down 48% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
NFLXNetflix, Inc.
Entertainment · $70.30 · beta 1.61
Why now
Entertainment · market cap $292.7b. Down 44% from 52-week high of $124.86 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +16%, comfortably above the S&P median. 45 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $92.55 (implying +32% 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 45% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. $292.7b market cap places it among the largest companies in the sector — distribution, R&D, and customer-acquisition costs amortize across a base peers can't replicate.
Risk
Down 44% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 1.61 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return.
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 VSNT and NFLX diverge
On the headline score the gap is 16.4 points in favor of NFLX. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
GrowthVSNT 40.8 · NFLX 88.6NFLX +47.8
ValueVSNT 87.5 · NFLX 65.4VSNT +22.1
QualityVSNT 76.4 · NFLX 92.3NFLX +15.9
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 NFLX or VSNT the better stock?
NFLX scores higher: NFLX 81.2, VSNT 64.8 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 NFLX and VSNT differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where NFLX leads by 48 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 NFLX and VSNT 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.