Bandwidth vs Progress Software
BAND and PRGS side by side, both in computer programming, data processing, and other computer related services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BAND and PRGS compare
Progress Software is the larger company, worth 1.3 times as much as Bandwidth ($1.8B against $1.4B).
Bandwidth grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (15.1% versus 6.4% for Progress Software).
Progress Software keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 9.2% compared with 1.0% at Bandwidth.
Progress Software scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 7 for Bandwidth), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | BAND | PRGS |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $1.4B | $1.8B |
| Share price | $43.76 | $43.78 |
| Change, 1 year | 202% | 2.1% |
| Change, 5 years | −36.4% | −16.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 2.10 | 0.70 |
| Employees | 1,100 | 2,801 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 7 | 13 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Performance score | 3 | 3 |
| Health score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 20.2× |
| P/S | 1.6× (better) | 1.8× |
| P/B | 3.7× | 3.4× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 16.5× |
| P/FCF | – | 5.6× |
| FCF yield | – | 17.8% |
| Fair value | $27.51 | $58.33 |
| Margin of safety | −59.1% | 24.9% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 15.1% (better) | 6.4% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 17.0% | 17.2% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 90.4% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 97.3% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | −1.2% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 36.7% | 82.2% (better) |
| Operating margin | −1.3% | 17.7% (better) |
| Net margin | 1.0% | 9.2% (better) |
| FCF margin | – | 31.9% |
| Return on equity | 2.3% | 18.3% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | −1.7% | 9.5% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.81 (better) | 2.33 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 6.34 |
| Interest coverage | – | 2.7× |
| Current ratio | 1.92 (better) | 0.80 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.03 (better) | 1.33 |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Payout ratio | – | 0.54% |
| Years of dividend growth | 0 | 0 |
| Buyback yield | – | 6.3% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 6.3% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 94.8% | 114% |
| Held by insiders | 1.6% | 2.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$19.8M | −$2.7M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 14.7% | 11.6% |
Go deeper
- BAND stock overview
- BAND income statement
- BAND valuation and score
- PRGS stock overview
- PRGS income statement
- PRGS valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.