Commvault Systems vs Progress Software
CVLT 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 CVLT and PRGS compare
Commvault Systems is the larger company, worth 3.5 times as much as Progress Software ($6.2B against $1.8B).
On earnings, Progress Software is cheaper: it trades at 20.2× trailing earnings, against 78.8× for Commvault Systems.
Commvault Systems grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (14.3% 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 6.6% at Commvault Systems.
Progress Software scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 12 for Commvault 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 | CVLT | PRGS |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $6.2B | $1.8B |
| Share price | $152.07 | $43.78 |
| Change, 1 year | 19.1% | 2.1% |
| Change, 5 years | 139% | −16.6% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.05 | 0.70 |
| Employees | 3,300 | 2,801 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 | 13 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 | 4 (better) |
| Performance score | 3 | 3 |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 78.8× | 20.2× (better) |
| P/S | 5.0× | 1.8× (better) |
| P/B | 496× | 3.4× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 52.7× | 16.5× (better) |
| P/FCF | 24.3× | 5.6× (better) |
| FCF yield | 4.1% | 17.8% (better) |
| Fair value | $84.35 | $58.33 |
| Margin of safety | −80.3% | 24.9% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 14.3% (better) | 6.4% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 10.3% | 17.2% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 3.0% | 90.4% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 8.4% | 97.3% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | −1.2% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 81.3% | 82.2% (better) |
| Operating margin | 7.4% | 17.7% (better) |
| Net margin | 6.6% | 9.2% (better) |
| FCF margin | 20.4% | 31.9% (better) |
| Return on equity | 74.2% (better) | 18.3% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 9.5% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 2.33 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 6.34 |
| Interest coverage | 15.9× (better) | 2.7× |
| Current ratio | 1.94 (better) | 0.80 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.07 (better) | 1.33 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.00% |
| Payout ratio | – | 0.54% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 0 |
| Buyback yield | 6.7% (better) | 6.3% |
| Shareholder yield | 6.7% (better) | 6.3% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 110% | 114% |
| Held by insiders | 1.5% | 2.4% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$13.9M | −$2.7M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 8.7% | 11.6% |
Go deeper
- CVLT stock overview
- CVLT income statement
- CVLT valuation and score
- PRGS stock overview
- PRGS income statement
- PRGS valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.