IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: Blank Capital Research ("BCR") is a technology platform, not a registered investment advisor or broker-dealer. The algorithmically generated signals, scores, and rankings provided on this site ("God Mode" Signals) are for informational and research purposes only and do not constitute financial advice, investment recommendations, or an offer to sell or solicit an offer to buy any securities.
HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS: The "timing scores" and "regime signals" displayed are based on quantitative models. Hypothetical or simulated performance results have certain inherent limitations. Unlike an actual performance record, simulated results do not represent actual trading. Also, since the trades have not actually been executed, the results may have under-or-over compensated for the impact, if any, of certain market factors, such as lack of liquidity.
RISK OF LOSS: Trading in financial markets involves a high degree of risk and may result in the loss of your entire investment. Data provided by third-party sources (Intrinio, Snowflake) is believed to be reliable but is not guaranteed for accuracy or completeness. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
© 2026 Blank Capital Research. All rights reserved. System Version: Aegis V8 (God Mode).
CyberArk Software Ltd. vs Medpace Holdings, Inc. — Side-by-side quantitative comparison
Based on our 6-factor quantitative model, Medpace Holdings, Inc. (MEDP) is the stronger stock with a composite score of 61.7/100 and a Hold rating, compared to CyberArk Software Ltd. (CYBR) at 51.9/100 (Hold). MEDP ranks #536 in our universe versus #1707 for CYBR, giving it an edge of 9.8 points across quality, value, momentum, investment, stability, and short interest factors.
For the Quality factor — which measures profitability and business quality through metrics like ROE, gross margins, and capital efficiency — MEDP leads at 93/100, while CYBR trails at 48/100 (MEDP: 93/100, CYBR: 48/100). The 44-point gap indicates a meaningful difference in quality characteristics between these stocks.
For the Value factor — which evaluates whether a stock is cheap or expensive relative to its earnings, book value, and cash flows — MEDP leads at 60/100, while CYBR trails at 30/100 (MEDP: 60/100, CYBR: 30/100). The 30-point gap indicates a meaningful difference in value characteristics between these stocks.
For the Momentum factor — which captures price trends and institutional sentiment over the trailing 3-12 months — MEDP leads at 74/100, while CYBR trails at 67/100 (MEDP: 74/100, CYBR: 67/100). The 7-point gap indicates a meaningful difference in momentum characteristics between these stocks.
On the Investment factor, which assesses capital allocation quality including reinvestment rates and asset growth, these stocks are closely matched (CYBR: 26/100, MEDP: 24/100). The narrow 2-point spread suggests similar investment profiles, so this factor alone is unlikely to be a decisive differentiator.
For the Stability factor — which measures financial health through leverage ratios and price volatility — CYBR leads at 75/100, while MEDP trails at 47/100 (CYBR: 75/100, MEDP: 47/100). The 28-point gap indicates a meaningful difference in stability characteristics between these stocks.
For the Short Interest factor — which tracks institutional bearish positioning and potential risk from elevated short selling — CYBR leads at 77/100, while MEDP trails at 36/100 (CYBR: 77/100, MEDP: 36/100). The 41-point gap indicates a meaningful difference in short interest characteristics between these stocks.
Based on our 6-factor model, Medpace Holdings, Inc. (MEDP) is utilizing a stronger overall profile than CYBR, with a Composite Score of 62 vs 52. MEDP holds a moderate edge, particularly in Quality and Value, though both stocks have merits.
| Overall Rating | ||
| Composite Score | 62 | 52 |
| Rank | #536 | #1,707 |
| Stars | 3 / 5 | 3 / 5 |
| Action | Hold | Hold |
| Factor Scores | ||
| Quality | 93 | 48 |
| Value | 60 | 30 |
| Momentum | 74 | 67 |
| Stability | 47 | 75 |
| Investment | 24 | 26 |
| Short Interest | 36 | 77 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E Ratio | 32.49 | — |
| P/B Ratio | 49.19 | — |
| P/S Ratio | 5.47 | — |
| EV/EBITDA | 24.34 | — |
| Dividend Yield | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Profitability | ||
| ROE | 67.3% | -5.9% |
| ROA | 20.7% | -3.5% |
| Gross Margin | 100.0% | 79.2% |
| Operating Margin | 21.5% | -7.3% |
| Net Margin | 16.8% | -9.3% |
| Growth & Risk | ||
| Revenue Growth | 23.7% | 33.1% |
| Debt/Equity | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Beta | 1.02 | — |
| Market | ||
| Market Cap | $14.44B | $14.08B |
Based on our 6-factor quantitative model, MEDP currently has the higher composite score (61.7/100, Hold) and ranks #536 in our universe. However, the "better" stock depends on your investment goals, risk tolerance, and time horizon. We recommend reviewing the full factor breakdown above before making a decision.
Our comparison analyzes six quantitative factors: Quality (profitability and business strength, 30% weight), Momentum (price trends, 25%), Value (valuation attractiveness, 15%), Investment (capital allocation, 10%), Stability (financial health, 10%), and Short Interest (institutional positioning, 10%). Each factor is scored 0-100 and combined into a composite score.
MEDP has the higher value score at 60/100 compared to CYBR at 30/100. A higher value score indicates the stock trades at a more attractive valuation relative to its earnings, book value, and cash flows.
Our stock rankings and comparisons are updated daily using the latest available market data, financial statements, and price information. Factor scores reflect the most recent quarterly filings and trailing price data.