Software - Infrastructure
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CISO vs QLYS vs RDWR vs VRNS vs TENB
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Software - Infrastructure
Software - Infrastructure
Software - Infrastructure
Software - Infrastructure
CISO vs QLYS vs RDWR vs VRNS vs TENB — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Software - Infrastructure | Software - Infrastructure | Software - Infrastructure | Software - Infrastructure | Software - Infrastructure |
| Market Cap | $10M | $3.34B | $1.22B | $3.37B | $2.47B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $28M | $685M | $302M | $660M | $1.02B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-11M | $201M | $20M | $-137M | $-12M |
| Gross Margin | 24.7% | 83.1% | 80.7% | 78.1% | 78.2% |
| Operating Margin | -31.0% | 33.7% | 3.8% | -21.9% | 2.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | 12.9x | 25.5x | 242.2x | 11.1x |
| Total Debt | $12M | $97M | $17M | $572M | $466M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $993K | $250M | $105M | $202M | $188M |
CISO vs QLYS vs RDWR vs VRNS vs TENB — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jan 22 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| CISO Global Inc. (CISO) | 100 | 0.4 | -99.6% |
| Qualys, Inc. (QLYS) | 100 | 74.1 | -25.9% |
| Radware Ltd. (RDWR) | 100 | 84.3 | -15.7% |
| Varonis Systems, In… (VRNS) | 100 | 77.0 | -23.0% |
| Tenable Holdings, I… (TENB) | 100 | 41.9 | -58.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CISO vs QLYS vs RDWR vs VRNS vs TENB
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, CISO doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
QLYS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- beta 0.53
- Lower volatility, beta 0.53, Low D/E 17.3%, current ratio 1.41x
- PEG 0.66 vs RDWR's 1.45
- 29.4% margin vs CISO's -41.0%
RDWR is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if momentum is your priority.
- +26.5% vs CISO's -66.5%
VRNS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding and defensive.
- 317.5% 10Y total return vs QLYS's 267.2%
- Beta 0.95, current ratio 1.97x
- 13.2% revenue growth vs CISO's -46.1%
TENB is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 11.0%, EPS growth 3.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 13.5%
- Lower P/E (11.1x vs 242.2x)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 13.2% revenue growth vs CISO's -46.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (11.1x vs 242.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 29.4% margin vs CISO's -41.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.53 vs CISO's 1.94, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 5 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +26.5% vs CISO's -66.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 19.1% ROA vs CISO's -45.4%, ROIC 47.5% vs -57.3% |
CISO vs QLYS vs RDWR vs VRNS vs TENB — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CISO vs QLYS vs RDWR vs VRNS vs TENB — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
QLYS leads in 2 of 6 categories
TENB leads 1 • RDWR leads 1 • CISO leads 0 • VRNS leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
QLYS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TENB is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.0B annually — 36.8x CISO's $28M. QLYS is the more profitable business, keeping 29.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CISO's -41.0%. On growth, VRNS holds the edge at +26.9% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $28M | $685M | $302M | $660M | $1.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$7M | $241M | $23M | -$135M | $72M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$11M | $201M | $20M | -$137M | -$12M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$6M | $290M | $43M | $120M | $263M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +24.7% | +83.1% | +80.7% | +78.1% | +78.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -31.0% | +33.7% | +3.8% | -21.9% | +2.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -41.0% | +29.4% | +6.7% | -20.7% | -1.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -23.2% | +42.4% | +14.2% | +18.1% | +25.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -14.0% | +9.8% | +9.9% | +26.9% | +9.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +83.9% | +10.1% | +131.7% | 0.0% | +106.3% |
Valuation Metrics
TENB leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 17.5x trailing earnings, QLYS trades at a 72% valuation discount to RDWR's 63.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), QLYS offers better value at 0.90x vs RDWR's 3.58x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $10M | $3.3B | $1.2B | $3.4B | $2.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $21M | $3.2B | $1.1B | $3.7B | $2.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.14x | 17.45x | 63.02x | -25.38x | -71.80x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 12.87x | 25.54x | 242.23x | 11.06x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.90x | 3.58x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 13.49x | 49.18x | — | 63.60x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.31x | 5.00x | 4.05x | 5.40x | 2.47x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.92x | 6.17x | 3.24x | 6.19x | 7.93x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 10.98x | 29.45x | 24.99x | 9.69x |
Profitability & Efficiency
QLYS leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
QLYS delivers a 37.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $37 in annual profit, vs $-70 for CISO. RDWR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.04x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CISO's 10.72x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), RDWR scores 7/9 vs CISO's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -69.6% | +37.2% | +5.3% | -27.4% | -3.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -45.4% | +19.1% | +3.1% | -8.2% | -0.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -57.3% | +47.5% | +3.0% | -11.0% | +0.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -123.7% | +37.8% | +2.5% | -14.0% | +0.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 10.72x | 0.17x | 0.04x | 0.96x | 1.43x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $11M | -$153M | -$88M | $369M | $278M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $992,589 | $250M | $105M | $202M | $188M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $12M | $97M | $17M | $572M | $466M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -0.13x | — | — | -9.01x | 1.02x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
RDWR leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in RDWR five years ago would be worth $10,190 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $35 for CISO. Over the past 12 months, RDWR leads with a +26.5% total return vs CISO's -66.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors RDWR at 13.4% vs CISO's -57.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -42.8% | -27.5% | +19.3% | -10.5% | -5.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -66.5% | -25.6% | +26.5% | -36.7% | -31.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -92.5% | -17.7% | +46.0% | +23.7% | -41.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.7% | -3.1% | +1.9% | -39.9% | -41.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.7% | +267.2% | +164.8% | +317.5% | -28.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -57.9% | -6.3% | +13.4% | +7.3% | -16.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — QLYS and RDWR 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 CISO's 1.94 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. RDWR currently trades 89.8% from its 52-week high vs CISO's 16.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.94x | 0.53x | 0.99x | 0.95x | 1.12x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $1.70 | $155.47 | $31.57 | $63.90 | $35.69 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.24 | $74.51 | $21.29 | $19.70 | $15.73 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +16.5% | +61.1% | +89.8% | +44.9% | +60.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 44.6 | 54.2 | 54.5 | 66.1 | 60.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 242K | 773K | 228K | 2.3M | 3.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: QLYS as "Hold", RDWR as "Hold", VRNS as "Buy", TENB as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 41.5% upside for QLYS (target: $134) vs -11.8% for RDWR (target: $25).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $134.30 | $25.00 | $36.00 | $27.94 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 48 | 14 | 34 | 28 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +5.5% | +0.9% | +3.4% | +10.0% |
QLYS leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). TENB leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
CISO vs QLYS vs RDWR vs VRNS vs TENB: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CISO or QLYS or RDWR or VRNS or TENB a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Varonis Systems, Inc.
(VRNS) is the stronger pick with 13. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -46. 1% for CISO Global Inc. (CISO). Qualys, Inc. (QLYS) offers the better valuation at 17. 5x trailing P/E (12. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Varonis Systems, Inc. (VRNS) a "Buy" — based on 34 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 — CISO or QLYS or RDWR or VRNS or TENB?
On trailing P/E, Qualys, Inc.
(QLYS) is the cheapest at 17. 5x versus Radware Ltd. at 63. 0x. On forward P/E, Tenable Holdings, Inc. is actually cheaper at 11. 1x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. 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 Radware Ltd. 's 1. 45x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CISO or QLYS or RDWR or VRNS or TENB?
Over the past 5 years, Radware Ltd.
(RDWR) delivered a total return of +1. 9%, compared to -99. 7% for CISO Global Inc. (CISO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: VRNS returned +317. 5% versus CISO's -99. 7%. 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 — CISO or QLYS or RDWR or VRNS or TENB?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Qualys, Inc.
(QLYS) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 53β versus CISO Global Inc. 's 1. 94β — meaning CISO is approximately 267% more volatile than QLYS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Radware Ltd. (RDWR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 4% versus 11% for CISO Global Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CISO or QLYS or RDWR or VRNS or TENB?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Varonis Systems, Inc.
(VRNS) is pulling ahead at 13. 2% versus -46. 1% for CISO Global Inc. (CISO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Radware Ltd. grew EPS 221. 4% year-over-year, compared to -31. 4% for Varonis Systems, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CISO leads at 26. 6% 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 — CISO or QLYS or RDWR or VRNS or TENB?
Qualys, Inc.
(QLYS) is the more profitable company, earning 29. 6% net margin versus -78. 8% for CISO Global Inc. — meaning it keeps 29. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: QLYS leads at 33. 2% versus -47. 4% for CISO. 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 CISO or QLYS or RDWR or VRNS or TENB 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 Radware Ltd. 's 1. 45x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Tenable Holdings, Inc. (TENB) trades at 11. 1x forward P/E versus 242. 2x for Varonis Systems, Inc. — 231. 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 — CISO or QLYS or RDWR or VRNS or TENB?
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.
09Is CISO or QLYS or RDWR or VRNS or TENB better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Qualys, Inc.
(QLYS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 53), +267. 2% 10Y return). CISO Global Inc. (CISO) carries a higher beta of 1. 94 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (QLYS: +267. 2%, CISO: -99. 7%), 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 CISO and QLYS and RDWR and VRNS and TENB?
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: CISO is a small-cap quality compounder stock; QLYS is a small-cap deep-value stock; RDWR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; VRNS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; TENB 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.
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.