Fortinet vs Palo Alto Networks
FTNT and PANW side by side, both in computer and office equipment. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How FTNT and PANW compare
Palo Alto Networks is the larger company, worth 3.0 times as much as Fortinet ($299B against $99.8B).
Palo Alto Networks grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (24.5% versus 18.8% for Fortinet).
Fortinet keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 28.2% compared with 2.7% at Palo Alto Networks.
Fortinet scores higher on the StockData Score (16 against 8 for Palo Alto Networks), 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 | FTNT | PANW |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $99.8B | $299B |
| Share price | $136.08 | $365.87 |
| Change, 1 year | 61.6% | 68.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 99.4% | 345% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.31 | 1.24 |
| Employees | 15K | 8,014 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 16 (better) | 8 |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 0 |
| Health score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 47.9× | – |
| P/S | 13.3× (better) | 26.1× |
| P/B | 64.4× | 10.9× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 37.4× (better) | 191× |
| P/FCF | 32.0× (better) | 72.8× |
| PEG | 1.51 | – |
| FCF yield | 3.1% (better) | 1.4% |
| Fair value | $109.03 | $54.12 |
| Margin of safety | −24.8% (better) | −576% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 18.8% | 24.5% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 21.3% | 22.0% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 9.3% (better) | −72.9% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 13.1% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 33.1% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 80.2% (better) | 70.4% |
| Operating margin | 32.4% (better) | 6.1% |
| Net margin | 28.2% (better) | 2.7% |
| FCF margin | 41.4% (better) | 35.8% |
| Return on equity | 117% (better) | 1.7% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 2.7% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.32 (better) | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −0.94 | – |
| Interest coverage | 136× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.28 (better) | 0.87 |
| Altman Z-score | 7.98 | 8.90 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | 2.8% (better) | 0.33% |
| Shareholder yield | 2.8% (better) | 0.33% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 68.6% | 81.9% |
| Held by insiders | 10.8% | 0.66% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$136M | −$123M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.9% | 2.7% |
Go deeper
- FTNT stock overview
- FTNT income statement
- FTNT valuation and score
- PANW stock overview
- PANW income statement
- PANW valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.