HubSpot vs Klaviyo
HUBS and KVYO 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 HUBS and KVYO compare
HubSpot is the larger company, worth 2.0 times as much as Klaviyo ($11.7B against $5.7B).
On earnings, HubSpot is cheaper: it trades at 84.8× trailing earnings, against 1007× for Klaviyo.
Klaviyo grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (28.9% versus 21.1% for HubSpot).
HubSpot keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 4.3% compared with 0.49% at Klaviyo.
HubSpot scores higher on the StockData Score (12 against 11 for Klaviyo), 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 | HUBS | KVYO |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $11.7B | $5.7B |
| Share price | $234.87 | $20.14 |
| Change, 1 year | −49.6% | −20.7% |
| Change, 5 years | −70.7% | – |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.53 | 1.09 |
| Employees | 8,882 | 2,368 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 12 (better) | 11 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 6 | 6 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 84.8× (better) | 1007× |
| P/S | 3.4× (better) | 4.1× |
| P/B | 7.1× | 5.9× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 45.5× | – |
| P/FCF | 14.7× (better) | 22.7× |
| FCF yield | 6.8% (better) | 4.4% |
| Fair value | $88.68 | $9.42 |
| Margin of safety | −165% | −114% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 21.1% | 28.9% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 28.8% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 83.2% (better) | 73.8% |
| Operating margin | 3.8% (better) | −1.9% |
| Net margin | 4.3% (better) | 0.49% |
| FCF margin | 23.1% (better) | 18.2% |
| Return on equity | 7.9% (better) | 0.66% |
| Return on invested capital | 31.0% (better) | −11.1% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Interest coverage | 203× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.38 | 3.13 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 4.84 | 8.90 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 5 | 5 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | 9.5% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 9.5% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 98.3% | 51.0% |
| Held by insiders | 3.9% | 62.5% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$22.4M (better) | −$191M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 9.6% | 19.7% |
Go deeper
- HUBS stock overview
- HUBS income statement
- HUBS valuation and score
- KVYO stock overview
- KVYO income statement
- KVYO valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.