Dynatrace vs UiPath
DT and PATH 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 DT and PATH compare
Dynatrace is the larger company, worth 2.3 times as much as UiPath ($16.7B against $7.2B).
On earnings, UiPath is cheaper: it trades at 20.5× trailing earnings, against 115× for Dynatrace.
Dynatrace grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (17.9% versus 15.0% for UiPath).
UiPath keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 21.0% compared with 7.2% at Dynatrace.
UiPath scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 13 for Dynatrace), 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 | DT | PATH |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $16.7B | $7.2B |
| Share price | $57.69 | $13.73 |
| Change, 1 year | 17.7% | −15.3% |
| Change, 5 years | −24.4% | −75.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.28 | 1.58 |
| Employees | 5,600 | 3,981 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 13 | 14 (better) |
| Valuation score | 1 | 1 |
| Growth score | 3 | 3 |
| Performance score | 3 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 115× | 20.5× (better) |
| P/S | 8.0× | 4.2× (better) |
| P/B | 6.8× | 3.7× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 61.1× | 32.8× (better) |
| P/FCF | 29.2× | 19.7× (better) |
| PEG | 8.59 | – |
| FCF yield | 3.4% | 5.1% (better) |
| Fair value | $26.19 | $12.14 |
| Margin of safety | −120% | −13.1% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 17.9% (better) | 15.0% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 23.5% (better) | 21.5% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −69.3% | 1695% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −69.3% | 2133% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 15.7% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 81.4% | 82.6% (better) |
| Operating margin | 12.1% (better) | 8.9% |
| Net margin | 7.2% | 21.0% (better) |
| FCF margin | 27.2% (better) | 21.1% |
| Return on equity | 5.9% | 20.0% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 9.6% | 34.7% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Interest coverage | 364× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.21 | 2.39 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 7.00 (better) | 4.91 |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 8 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | 4.3% (better) | 3.8% |
| Shareholder yield | 4.3% (better) | 3.8% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 105% | 69.3% |
| Held by insiders | 5.6% | 28.5% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$4.6M (better) | −$54.0M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.3% | 29.1% |
Go deeper
- DT stock overview
- DT income statement
- DT valuation and score
- PATH stock overview
- PATH income statement
- PATH valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.