Cognizant Technology Solutions vs EPAM Systems
CTSH and EPAM 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 CTSH and EPAM compare
Cognizant Technology Solutions is the larger company, worth 4.0 times as much as EPAM Systems ($29.3B against $7.2B).
On earnings, Cognizant Technology Solutions is cheaper: it trades at 11.9× trailing earnings, against 19.0× for EPAM Systems.
EPAM Systems grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (10.8% versus 5.0% for Cognizant Technology Solutions).
Cognizant Technology Solutions keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 11.8% compared with 7.2% at EPAM Systems.
Cognizant Technology Solutions pays a dividend yielding 2.0%; EPAM Systems does not pay one.
Cognizant Technology Solutions scores higher on the StockData Score (22 against 16 for EPAM Systems), 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 | CTSH | EPAM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $29.3B | $7.2B |
| Share price | $65.11 | $140.51 |
| Change, 1 year | −9.2% | −13.7% |
| Change, 5 years | −18.5% | −80.1% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.91 | 1.48 |
| Employees | 352K | 14K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 22 (better) | 16 |
| Valuation score | 6 | 6 |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Health score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 11.9× (better) | 19.0× |
| P/S | 1.3× | 1.3× (better) |
| P/B | 2.0× (better) | 2.1× |
| EV/EBITDA | 7.3× (better) | 9.4× |
| P/FCF | 12.4× (better) | 15.0× |
| PEG | 10.60 | – |
| FCF yield | 8.1% (better) | 6.7% |
| Fair value | $106.83 | $210.45 |
| Margin of safety | 39.0% (better) | 33.2% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 5.0% | 10.8% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 4.9% | 15.5% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 20.9% (better) | 0.13% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 27.1% (better) | 5.3% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 12.2% (better) | 3.7% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 33.4% (better) | 29.4% |
| Operating margin | 15.7% (better) | 10.0% |
| Net margin | 11.8% (better) | 7.2% |
| FCF margin | 10.8% (better) | 8.6% |
| Return on equity | 17.4% (better) | 11.2% |
| Return on invested capital | 18.3% (better) | 15.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.11 | 0.01 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.00 | −1.11 |
| Interest coverage | 73.2× | – |
| Current ratio | 2.22 | 2.75 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 5.45 | 6.13 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 2.0% | – |
| Payout ratio | 23.9% | – |
| Years of dividend growth | 6 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 7.1% | – |
| Buyback yield | 7.6% | 9.9% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 9.5% | 9.9% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 113% | 111% |
| Held by insiders | 0.14% | 4.2% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$5.9M | −$1.6M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 7.3% | 13.0% |
Go deeper
- CTSH stock overview
- CTSH income statement
- CTSH valuation and score
- EPAM stock overview
- EPAM income statement
- EPAM valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.