ASAN vs MNDY vs TEAM vs PCTY

For growth investors, monday.

com Ltd. (MNDY) is the stronger pick with 26. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 9. 2% for Asana, Inc. (ASAN). Paylocity Holding Corporation (PCTY) offers the better valuation at 27. 1x trailing P/E (14. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate monday. com Ltd. (MNDY) a "Buy" — based on 25 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.

On trailing P/E, Paylocity Holding Corporation (PCTY) is the cheapest at 27.

1x versus monday. com Ltd. at 34. 1x. On forward P/E, Paylocity Holding Corporation is actually cheaper at 14. 0x.

Over the past 5 years, Paylocity Holding Corporation (PCTY) delivered a total return of -35.

2%, compared to -75. 5% for Asana, Inc. (ASAN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: TEAM returned +338. 0% versus ASAN's -75. 5%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Paylocity Holding Corporation (PCTY) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

43β versus Asana, Inc. 's 1. 45β — meaning ASAN is approximately 238% more volatile than PCTY relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Paylocity Holding Corporation (PCTY) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 18% versus 135% for Asana, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), monday.

com Ltd. (MNDY) is pulling ahead at 26. 7% versus 9. 2% for Asana, Inc. (ASAN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: monday. com Ltd. grew EPS 261. 3% year-over-year, compared to 10. 7% for Paylocity Holding Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, MNDY leads at 33. 4% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.

Paylocity Holding Corporation (PCTY) is the more profitable company, earning 14.

2% net margin versus -23. 9% for Asana, Inc. — meaning it keeps 14. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: PCTY leads at 19. 1% versus -25. 0% for ASAN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MNDY leads at 89. 2%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.

On forward earnings alone, Paylocity Holding Corporation (PCTY) trades at 14.

0x forward P/E versus 27. 5x for Asana, Inc. — 13. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ASAN: 74. 3% to $12. 29.

None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.

All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Paylocity Holding Corporation (PCTY) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

43), +218. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (PCTY: +218. 2%, ASAN: -75. 5%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.

Both stocks operate in the Technology sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

In terms of investment character: ASAN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MNDY is a small-cap high-growth stock; TEAM is a mid-cap high-growth stock; PCTY is a small-cap quality compounder stock. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.