Software - Infrastructure
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CCSI vs NTCT vs QLYS vs VIAV vs CSCO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Software - Infrastructure
Software - Infrastructure
Communication Equipment
Communication Equipment
CCSI vs NTCT vs QLYS vs VIAV vs CSCO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Software - Infrastructure | Software - Infrastructure | Software - Infrastructure | Communication Equipment | Communication Equipment |
| Market Cap | $520M | $2.77B | $3.34B | $11.81B | $364.95B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $351M | $861M | $685M | $1.37B | $59.05B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $88M | $96M | $201M | $-55M | $11.08B |
| Gross Margin | 80.2% | 79.2% | 83.1% | 55.7% | 64.4% |
| Operating Margin | 42.9% | 12.8% | 33.7% | 8.2% | 23.0% |
| Forward P/E | 5.0x | 15.9x | 12.9x | 55.2x | 22.2x |
| Total Debt | $580M | $76M | $97M | $692M | $29.64B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $75M | $457M | $250M | $424M | $9.47B |
CCSI vs NTCT vs QLYS vs VIAV vs CSCO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Sep 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Consensus Cloud Sol… (CCSI) | 100 | 79.4 | -20.6% |
| NetScout Systems, I… (NTCT) | 100 | 142.0 | +42.0% |
| Qualys, Inc. (QLYS) | 100 | 85.3 | -14.7% |
| Viavi Solutions Inc. (VIAV) | 100 | 324.3 | +224.3% |
| Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) | 100 | 169.3 | +69.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CCSI vs NTCT vs QLYS vs VIAV vs CSCO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CCSI is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if value is your priority.
- Lower P/E (5.0x vs 22.2x)
Among these 5 stocks, NTCT doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
QLYS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 10.1%, EPS growth 17.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 11.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.53, Low D/E 17.3%, current ratio 1.41x
- PEG 0.66 vs VIAV's 12.09
- Beta 0.53, current ratio 1.41x
VIAV ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding.
- 7.2% 10Y total return vs CSCO's 301.7%
- +466.6% vs QLYS's -25.6%
CSCO is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.92, yield 1.7%
- 1.7% yield; 15-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 10.1% revenue growth vs NTCT's -0.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (5.0x vs 22.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 29.4% margin vs VIAV's -4.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.53 vs VIAV's 1.54, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.7% yield; 15-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +466.6% vs QLYS's -25.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 19.1% ROA vs VIAV's -2.3%, ROIC 47.5% vs 5.5% |
CCSI vs NTCT vs QLYS vs VIAV vs CSCO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CCSI vs NTCT vs QLYS vs VIAV vs CSCO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
QLYS leads in 1 of 6 categories
CCSI leads 1 • NTCT leads 1 • VIAV leads 1 • CSCO leads 1 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
QLYS leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CSCO is the larger business by revenue, generating $59.1B annually — 168.2x CCSI's $351M. QLYS is the more profitable business, keeping 29.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to VIAV's -4.0%. On growth, VIAV holds the edge at +42.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $351M | $861M | $685M | $1.4B | $59.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $164M | $171M | $241M | $207M | $16.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $88M | $96M | $201M | -$55M | $11.1B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $112M | $275M | $290M | $46M | $12.8B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +80.2% | +79.2% | +83.1% | +55.7% | +64.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +42.9% | +12.8% | +33.7% | +8.2% | +23.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +25.1% | +11.1% | +29.4% | -4.0% | +18.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +32.0% | +32.0% | +42.4% | +3.3% | +21.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +1.5% | -0.5% | +9.8% | +42.8% | +9.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +21.5% | +11.9% | +10.1% | -70.2% | +29.5% |
Valuation Metrics
CCSI leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 6.5x trailing earnings, CCSI trades at a 98% valuation discount to VIAV's 340.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), QLYS offers better value at 0.90x vs VIAV's 74.57x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $520M | $2.8B | $3.3B | $11.8B | $365.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.0B | $2.4B | $3.2B | $12.1B | $385.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 6.50x | -7.57x | 17.45x | 340.33x | 36.14x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 4.99x | 15.87x | 12.87x | 55.18x | 22.18x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.90x | 74.57x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 6.07x | — | 13.49x | 90.43x | 26.34x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.49x | 3.36x | 5.00x | 10.89x | 6.44x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 39.95x | 1.78x | 6.17x | 14.77x | 7.87x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 4.92x | 13.11x | 10.98x | 190.52x | 27.46x |
Profitability & Efficiency
NTCT leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CCSI delivers a 52.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $53 in annual profit, vs $-7 for VIAV. NTCT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.05x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CCSI's 42.14x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CSCO scores 8/9 vs VIAV's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +52.9% | +6.1% | +37.2% | -6.9% | +23.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +13.2% | +4.3% | +19.1% | -2.3% | +9.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +22.2% | -19.3% | +47.5% | +5.5% | +13.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +26.8% | -18.5% | +37.8% | +4.9% | +13.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 42.14x | 0.05x | 0.17x | 0.89x | 0.63x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $506M | -$381M | -$153M | $269M | $20.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $75M | $457M | $250M | $424M | $9.5B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $580M | $76M | $97M | $692M | $29.6B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 5.95x | 55.89x | — | 2.70x | 9.64x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
VIAV leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in VIAV five years ago would be worth $31,204 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $7,940 for CCSI. Over the past 12 months, VIAV leads with a +466.6% total return vs QLYS's -25.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors VIAV at 77.7% vs CCSI's -7.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +30.2% | +42.6% | -27.5% | +181.3% | +22.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +26.8% | +80.5% | -25.6% | +466.6% | +57.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -21.8% | +30.3% | -17.7% | +461.0% | +109.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -20.6% | +42.9% | -3.1% | +212.0% | +87.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -20.6% | +66.6% | +267.2% | +715.5% | +301.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -7.9% | +9.2% | -6.3% | +77.7% | +27.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — NTCT and QLYS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
QLYS is the less volatile stock with a 0.53 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than VIAV's 1.54 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. NTCT currently trades 97.6% from its 52-week high vs QLYS's 61.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.51x | 1.12x | 0.53x | 1.54x | 0.92x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $31.66 | $39.24 | $155.47 | $60.43 | $94.72 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $19.24 | $19.98 | $74.51 | $8.87 | $59.07 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +89.3% | +97.6% | +61.1% | +84.5% | +97.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 51.0 | 68.6 | 54.2 | 66.7 | 63.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 123K | 552K | 773K | 6.3M | 18.9M |
Analyst Outlook
CSCO leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CCSI as "Buy", NTCT as "Hold", QLYS as "Hold", VIAV as "Buy", CSCO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 41.5% upside for QLYS (target: $134) vs -36.8% for VIAV (target: $32). CSCO is the only dividend payer here at 1.75% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $25.00 | $29.00 | $134.30 | $32.25 | $96.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 6 | 21 | 48 | 19 | 73 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | +1.7% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — | — | 1 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | $1.61 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +4.4% | +0.9% | +5.5% | +0.1% | +2.0% |
QLYS leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). CCSI leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
CCSI vs NTCT vs QLYS vs VIAV vs CSCO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CCSI or NTCT or QLYS or VIAV or CSCO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Qualys, Inc.
(QLYS) is the stronger pick with 10. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -0. 8% for NetScout Systems, Inc. (NTCT). Consensus Cloud Solutions, Inc. (CCSI) offers the better valuation at 6. 5x trailing P/E (5. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Consensus Cloud Solutions, Inc. (CCSI) a "Buy" — based on 6 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.
02Which has the better valuation — CCSI or NTCT or QLYS or VIAV or CSCO?
On trailing P/E, Consensus Cloud Solutions, Inc.
(CCSI) is the cheapest at 6. 5x versus Viavi Solutions Inc. at 340. 3x. On forward P/E, Consensus Cloud Solutions, Inc. is actually cheaper at 5. 0x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Qualys, Inc. wins at 0. 66x versus Viavi Solutions Inc. 's 12. 09x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CCSI or NTCT or QLYS or VIAV or CSCO?
Over the past 5 years, Viavi Solutions Inc.
(VIAV) delivered a total return of +212. 0%, compared to -20. 6% for Consensus Cloud Solutions, Inc. (CCSI). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: VIAV returned +715. 5% versus CCSI's -20. 6%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — CCSI or NTCT or QLYS or VIAV or CSCO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Qualys, Inc.
(QLYS) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 53β versus Viavi Solutions Inc. 's 1. 54β — meaning VIAV is approximately 191% more volatile than QLYS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, NetScout Systems, Inc. (NTCT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 5% versus 42% for Consensus Cloud Solutions, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CCSI or NTCT or QLYS or VIAV or CSCO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Qualys, Inc.
(QLYS) is pulling ahead at 10. 1% versus -0. 8% for NetScout Systems, Inc. (NTCT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Viavi Solutions Inc. grew EPS 225. 0% year-over-year, compared to -144. 4% for NetScout Systems, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, QLYS leads at 11. 0% 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.
06Which has better profit margins — CCSI or NTCT or QLYS or VIAV or CSCO?
Qualys, Inc.
(QLYS) is the more profitable company, earning 29. 6% net margin versus -44. 6% for NetScout Systems, Inc. — meaning it keeps 29. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CCSI leads at 43. 0% versus -44. 7% for NTCT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — QLYS leads at 82. 8%, 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.
07Is CCSI or NTCT or QLYS or VIAV or CSCO more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, Qualys, Inc. (QLYS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 66x versus Viavi Solutions Inc. 's 12. 09x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Consensus Cloud Solutions, Inc. (CCSI) trades at 5. 0x forward P/E versus 55. 2x for Viavi Solutions Inc. — 50. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for QLYS: 41. 5% to $134. 30.
08Which pays a better dividend — CCSI or NTCT or QLYS or VIAV or CSCO?
In this comparison, CSCO (1.
7% yield) pays a dividend. CCSI, NTCT, QLYS, VIAV do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CCSI or NTCT or QLYS or VIAV or CSCO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Cisco Systems, Inc.
(CSCO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 92), 1. 7% yield, +301. 7% 10Y return). Consensus Cloud Solutions, Inc. (CCSI) carries a higher beta of 1. 51 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CSCO: +301. 7%, CCSI: -20. 6%), 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.
10What are the main differences between CCSI and NTCT and QLYS and VIAV and CSCO?
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: CCSI is a small-cap deep-value stock; NTCT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; QLYS is a small-cap deep-value stock; VIAV is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; CSCO is a large-cap quality compounder stock. CSCO pays a dividend while CCSI, NTCT, QLYS, VIAV do not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.