N-able vs Rapid7
NABL and RPD 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 NABL and RPD compare
N-able and Rapid7 are about the same size, with market caps of $920M and $971M.
N-able grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (8.3% versus −0.97% for Rapid7).
Rapid7 keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 1.6% compared with −2.3% at N-able.
N-able scores higher on the StockData Score (8 against 5 for Rapid7), 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 | NABL | RPD |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $920M | $971M |
| Share price | $4.87 | $14.41 |
| Change, 1 year | −39.2% | 2.9% |
| Change, 5 years | −59.1% | −89.1% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.75 | 1.55 |
| Employees | 1,852 | 2,613 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 8 (better) | 5 |
| Valuation score | 4 (better) | 1 |
| Growth score | 1 | 1 |
| Performance score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Health score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 68.6× |
| P/S | 1.7× | 1.1× (better) |
| P/B | 1.2× (better) | 4.4× |
| EV/EBITDA | 12.2× | 4.1× (better) |
| P/FCF | 12.2× | 6.9× (better) |
| FCF yield | 8.2% | 14.4% (better) |
| Fair value | $9.23 | $15.76 |
| Margin of safety | 47.2% (better) | 8.6% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 8.3% (better) | −0.97% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 10.9% | 15.9% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | −38.3% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | −38.2% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 75.9% (better) | 69.1% |
| Operating margin | 10.2% (better) | 1.6% |
| Net margin | −2.3% | 1.6% (better) |
| FCF margin | 14.1% | 16.5% (better) |
| Return on equity | −1.5% | 8.0% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 2.6% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.51 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.01 | – |
| Interest coverage | – | 1.3× |
| Current ratio | 1.11 (better) | 0.83 |
| Altman Z-score | 1.52 (better) | −0.00 |
| Piotroski F-score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 101% | 103% |
| Held by insiders | 62.4% | 14.7% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | −$23.2K |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 5.3% | 11.9% |
Go deeper
- NABL stock overview
- NABL income statement
- NABL valuation and score
- RPD stock overview
- RPD income statement
- RPD valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.