Qualys vs Tenable
QLYS and TENB 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 QLYS and TENB compare
Qualys is the larger company, worth 1.3 times as much as Tenable ($6.0B against $4.5B).
On earnings, Qualys is cheaper: it trades at 28.8× trailing earnings, against 815× for Tenable.
Qualys grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (10.4% versus 9.9% for Tenable).
Qualys keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 29.6% compared with 0.65% at Tenable.
Qualys scores higher on the StockData Score (19 against 7 for Tenable), 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 | QLYS | TENB |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $6.0B | $4.5B |
| Share price | $172.94 | $40.76 |
| Change, 1 year | 15.3% | 48.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 25.8% | −25.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.20 | 1.22 |
| Employees | 2,625 | 1,995 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 19 (better) | 7 |
| Valuation score | 2 (better) | 0 |
| Growth score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 6 (better) | 0 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 28.8× (better) | 815× |
| P/S | 8.3× | 4.3× (better) |
| P/B | 9.3× (better) | 22.6× |
| EV/EBITDA | 21.6× (better) | 53.1× |
| P/FCF | 18.4× | 17.0× (better) |
| PEG | 1.12 | – |
| FCF yield | 5.4% | 5.9% (better) |
| Fair value | $165.17 | $16.15 |
| Margin of safety | −4.7% (better) | −152% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 10.4% (better) | 9.9% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 13.0% | 17.8% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 12.8% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 16.5% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 19.3% | – |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 83.3% (better) | 78.1% |
| Operating margin | 34.4% (better) | 3.6% |
| Net margin | 29.6% (better) | 0.65% |
| FCF margin | 45.0% (better) | 25.3% |
| Return on equity | 36.3% (better) | 2.5% |
| Return on invested capital | 66.2% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | – |
| Interest coverage | – | 1.4× |
| Current ratio | 1.53 (better) | 0.79 |
| Altman Z-score | 8.03 (better) | 1.78 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | 3.7% | 7.9% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 3.7% | 7.9% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 107% | 105% |
| Held by insiders | 1.3% | 1.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$21.1M | −$4.4M (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 9.0% | 14.6% |
Go deeper
- QLYS stock overview
- QLYS income statement
- QLYS valuation and score
- TENB stock overview
- TENB income statement
- TENB valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.