Compare Stocks

5 / 10
Try these comparisons:

Stock Comparison

INTZ vs PANW vs FTNT vs QLYS vs TENB

Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.

Live fundamentals10-year financials5-year price chart
INTZ
Intrusion Inc.

Software - Infrastructure

TechnologyNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$16M
5Y Perf.-99.2%
PANW
Palo Alto Networks, Inc.

Software - Infrastructure

TechnologyNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$138.16B
5Y Perf.+430.2%
FTNT
Fortinet, Inc.

Software - Infrastructure

TechnologyNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$79.89B
5Y Perf.+309.7%
QLYS
Qualys, Inc.

Software - Infrastructure

TechnologyNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$3.34B
5Y Perf.-18.2%
TENB
Tenable Holdings, Inc.

Software - Infrastructure

TechnologyNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$2.47B
5Y Perf.-30.2%

INTZ vs PANW vs FTNT vs QLYS vs TENB — Key Financials

Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.

Company Snapshot
INTZ logoINTZ
PANW logoPANW
FTNT logoFTNT
QLYS logoQLYS
TENB logoTENB
IndustrySoftware - InfrastructureSoftware - InfrastructureSoftware - InfrastructureSoftware - InfrastructureSoftware - Infrastructure
Market Cap$16M$138.16B$79.89B$3.34B$2.47B
Revenue (TTM)$7M$9.89B$7.11B$685M$1.02B
Net Income (TTM)$-9M$1.28B$1.95B$201M$-12M
Gross Margin75.8%73.5%80.7%83.1%78.2%
Operating Margin-129.1%14.4%31.1%33.7%2.9%
Forward P/E56.4x36.4x12.4x11.1x
Total Debt$2M$338M$996M$97M$466M
Cash & Equiv.$4M$2.27B$2.50B$250M$188M

INTZ vs PANW vs FTNT vs QLYS vs TENBLong-Term Stock Performance

Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.

INTZ
PANW
FTNT
QLYS
TENB
StockMay 20May 26Return
Intrusion Inc. (INTZ)1000.8-99.2%
Palo Alto Networks,… (PANW)100530.2+430.2%
Fortinet, Inc. (FTNT)100409.7+309.7%
Qualys, Inc. (QLYS)10081.8-18.2%
Tenable Holdings, I… (TENB)10069.8-30.2%

Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.

Quick Verdict: INTZ vs PANW vs FTNT vs QLYS vs TENB

Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.

Bottom line: QLYS leads in 2 of 7 categories (5-stock set), making it the strongest pick for profitability and margin quality and capital preservation and lower volatility. Intrusion Inc. is the stronger pick specifically for growth and revenue expansion. PANW, FTNT, and TENB also each lead in at least one category. As sector peers, any of these can serve as alternatives in the same allocation.
INTZ
Intrusion Inc.
The Growth Play

INTZ is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.

  • Rev growth 22.9%, EPS growth 68.9%, 3Y rev CAGR -2.0%
  • 22.9% revenue growth vs QLYS's 10.1%
Best for: growth exposure
PANW
Palo Alto Networks, Inc.
The Momentum Pick

PANW ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.

  • +4.5% vs INTZ's -37.5%
Best for: momentum
FTNT
Fortinet, Inc.
The Long-Run Compounder

FTNT is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.

  • 15.8% 10Y total return vs PANW's 7.5%
  • 19.4% ROA vs INTZ's -62.0%
Best for: long-term compounding
QLYS
Qualys, Inc.
The Income Pick

QLYS has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in 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 0.64 vs FTNT's 1.10
  • Beta 0.53, current ratio 1.41x
Best for: income & stability and sleep-well-at-night
TENB
Tenable Holdings, Inc.
The Value Play

TENB is the clearest fit if your priority is value.

  • Lower P/E (11.1x vs 36.4x)
Best for: value
See the full category breakdown
CategoryWinnerWhy
GrowthINTZ logoINTZ22.9% revenue growth vs QLYS's 10.1%
ValueTENB logoTENBLower P/E (11.1x vs 36.4x)
Quality / MarginsQLYS logoQLYS29.4% margin vs INTZ's -127.6%
Stability / SafetyQLYS logoQLYSBeta 0.53 vs INTZ's 2.65, lower leverage
DividendsTieNone of these 5 stocks pay a meaningful dividend
Momentum (1Y)PANW logoPANW+4.5% vs INTZ's -37.5%
Efficiency (ROA)FTNT logoFTNT19.4% ROA vs INTZ's -62.0%

INTZ vs PANW vs FTNT vs QLYS vs TENB — Revenue Breakdown by Segment

How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units

INTZIntrusion Inc.
FY 2024
Consulting Revenues
100.0%$4M
PANWPalo Alto Networks, Inc.
FY 2025
Subscription
53.9%$5.0B
Support
26.5%$2.4B
Product
19.5%$1.8B
FTNTFortinet, Inc.
FY 2025
Security Subscription
38.7%$2.6B
Product
32.6%$2.2B
Technical Support and Other
28.6%$1.9B
QLYSQualys, Inc.
FY 2025
Reportable Segment
100.0%$669M
TENBTenable Holdings, Inc.
FY 2025
Subscription and Circulation
92.0%$920M
License and Maintenance
4.5%$45M
Service, Other
3.5%$35M

INTZ vs PANW vs FTNT vs QLYS vs TENB — Financial Metrics

Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.

BEST OVERALLPANWLAGGINGFTNT

Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)

QLYS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

PANW is the larger business by revenue, generating $9.9B annually — 1394.2x INTZ's $7M. QLYS is the more profitable business, keeping 29.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to INTZ's -127.6%. On growth, FTNT holds the edge at +20.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.

MetricINTZ logoINTZIntrusion Inc.PANW logoPANWPalo Alto Network…FTNT logoFTNTFortinet, Inc.QLYS logoQLYSQualys, Inc.TENB logoTENBTenable Holdings,…
RevenueTrailing 12 months$7M$9.9B$7.1B$685M$1.0B
EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax-$8M$1.9B$2.3B$241M$72M
Net IncomeAfter-tax profit-$9M$1.3B$2.0B$201M-$12M
Free Cash FlowCash after capex-$9M$4.1B$2.4B$290M$263M
Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue+75.8%+73.5%+80.7%+83.1%+78.2%
Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue-129.1%+14.4%+31.1%+33.7%+2.9%
Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue-127.6%+13.0%+27.5%+29.4%-1.2%
FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue-131.2%+41.1%+34.3%+42.4%+25.7%
Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year-11.6%+14.9%+20.1%+9.8%+9.6%
EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year+56.3%+57.9%+28.6%+10.1%+106.3%
QLYS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

Valuation Metrics

TENB leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.

At 17.5x trailing earnings, QLYS trades at a 86% valuation discount to PANW's 122.8x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), QLYS offers better value at 0.90x vs FTNT's 1.34x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.

MetricINTZ logoINTZIntrusion Inc.PANW logoPANWPalo Alto Network…FTNT logoFTNTFortinet, Inc.QLYS logoQLYSQualys, Inc.TENB logoTENBTenable Holdings,…
Market CapShares × price$16M$138.2B$79.9B$3.3B$2.5B
Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash$14M$136.2B$78.4B$3.2B$2.7B
Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS-1.74x122.83x44.43x17.45x-71.80x
Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est.56.39x36.44x12.43x11.06x
PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate1.34x0.90x
EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple85.88x35.09x13.49x63.60x
Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue2.30x14.98x11.75x5.00x2.47x
Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share2.18x17.82x65.26x6.17x7.93x
Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF39.82x35.89x10.98x9.69x
TENB leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.

Profitability & Efficiency

Evenly matched — PANW and FTNT each lead in 3 of 9 comparable metrics.

FTNT delivers a 155.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $156 in annual profit, vs $-86 for INTZ. PANW carries lower financial leverage with a 0.04x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to TENB's 1.43x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FTNT scores 7/9 vs PANW's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.

MetricINTZ logoINTZIntrusion Inc.PANW logoPANWPalo Alto Network…FTNT logoFTNTFortinet, Inc.QLYS logoQLYSQualys, Inc.TENB logoTENBTenable Holdings,…
ROE (TTM)Return on equity-86.0%+13.6%+155.7%+37.2%-3.7%
ROA (TTM)Return on assets-62.0%+5.1%+19.4%+19.1%-0.7%
ROICReturn on invested capital-144.1%+17.1%+47.5%+0.2%
ROCEReturn on capital employed-111.5%+8.9%+37.7%+37.8%+0.1%
Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–954765
Debt / EquityFinancial leverage0.24x0.04x0.81x0.17x1.43x
Net DebtTotal debt minus cash-$2M-$1.9B-$1.5B-$153M$278M
Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets$4M$2.3B$2.5B$250M$188M
Total DebtShort + long-term debt$2M$338M$996M$97M$466M
Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense-111.59x1559.00x214.35x1.02x
Evenly matched — PANW and FTNT each lead in 3 of 9 comparable metrics.

Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)

PANW leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

A $10,000 investment in PANW five years ago would be worth $34,443 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $39 for INTZ. Over the past 12 months, PANW leads with a +4.5% total return vs INTZ's -37.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors PANW at 27.1% vs INTZ's -68.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.

MetricINTZ logoINTZIntrusion Inc.PANW logoPANWPalo Alto Network…FTNT logoFTNTFortinet, Inc.QLYS logoQLYSQualys, Inc.TENB logoTENBTenable Holdings,…
YTD ReturnYear-to-date-33.9%+9.6%+38.6%-27.5%-5.2%
1-Year ReturnPast 12 months-37.5%+4.5%+1.2%-25.6%-31.2%
3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends-96.7%+105.2%+63.4%-17.7%-41.1%
5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends-99.6%+244.4%+154.9%-3.1%-41.9%
10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends-88.2%+746.7%+1584.4%+267.2%-28.8%
CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return-68.1%+27.1%+17.8%-6.3%-16.2%
PANW leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

Risk & Volatility

Evenly matched — FTNT and QLYS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

QLYS is the less volatile stock with a 0.53 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than INTZ's 2.65 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FTNT currently trades 96.1% from its 52-week high vs INTZ's 30.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.

MetricINTZ logoINTZIntrusion Inc.PANW logoPANWPalo Alto Network…FTNT logoFTNTFortinet, Inc.QLYS logoQLYSQualys, Inc.TENB logoTENBTenable Holdings,…
Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 5002.40x1.02x1.01x0.46x1.14x
52-Week HighHighest price in past year$2.64$223.61$112.39$155.47$35.69
52-Week LowLowest price in past year$0.73$139.57$70.12$74.51$15.73
% of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak+30.3%+87.9%+96.1%+61.1%+60.4%
RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–10043.761.664.354.260.1
Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded133K7.5M5.8M773K3.0M
Evenly matched — FTNT and QLYS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst Outlook

Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.

Analyst consensus: PANW as "Buy", FTNT as "Hold", QLYS as "Hold", TENB as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 29.7% upside for TENB (target: $28) vs -10.5% for FTNT (target: $97).

MetricINTZ logoINTZIntrusion Inc.PANW logoPANWPalo Alto Network…FTNT logoFTNTFortinet, Inc.QLYS logoQLYSQualys, Inc.TENB logoTENBTenable Holdings,…
Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sellBuyHoldHoldBuy
Price TargetConsensus 12-month target$208.65$96.59$103.00$27.94
# AnalystsCovering analysts86684828
Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price
Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises5
Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS
Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap0.0%0.0%+2.9%+5.5%+10.0%
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Key Takeaway

QLYS leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). TENB leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.

Best OverallPalo Alto Networks, Inc. (PANW)Leads 1 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...

INTZ vs PANW vs FTNT vs QLYS vs TENB: Key Questions Answered

10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily

01

Is INTZ or PANW or FTNT or QLYS or TENB a better buy right now?

For growth investors, Intrusion Inc.

(INTZ) is the stronger pick with 22. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 10. 1% for Qualys, Inc. (QLYS). Qualys, Inc. (QLYS) offers the better valuation at 17. 5x trailing P/E (12. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Palo Alto Networks, Inc. (PANW) a "Buy" — based on 86 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.

02

Which has the better valuation — INTZ or PANW or FTNT or QLYS or TENB?

On trailing P/E, Qualys, Inc.

(QLYS) is the cheapest at 17. 5x versus Palo Alto Networks, Inc. at 122. 8x. 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. 64x versus Fortinet, Inc. 's 1. 10x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

03

Which is the better long-term investment — INTZ or PANW or FTNT or QLYS or TENB?

Over the past 5 years, Palo Alto Networks, Inc.

(PANW) delivered a total return of +244. 4%, compared to -99. 6% for Intrusion Inc. (INTZ). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FTNT returned +1680% versus INTZ's -88. 7%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

04

Which is safer — INTZ or PANW or FTNT or QLYS or TENB?

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Qualys, Inc.

(QLYS) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 46β versus Intrusion Inc. 's 2. 40β — meaning INTZ is approximately 422% more volatile than QLYS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Palo Alto Networks, Inc. (PANW) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 4% versus 143% for Tenable Holdings, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

05

Which is growing faster — INTZ or PANW or FTNT or QLYS or TENB?

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Intrusion Inc.

(INTZ) is pulling ahead at 22. 9% versus 10. 1% for Qualys, Inc. (QLYS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Intrusion Inc. grew EPS 68. 9% year-over-year, compared to -56. 0% for Palo Alto Networks, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, PANW leads at 18. 8% 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.

06

Which has better profit margins — INTZ or PANW or FTNT or QLYS or TENB?

Qualys, Inc.

(QLYS) is the more profitable company, earning 29. 6% net margin versus -127. 7% for Intrusion 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 -129. 2% for INTZ. 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.

07

Is INTZ or PANW or FTNT or QLYS 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. 64x versus Fortinet, Inc. 's 1. 10x. 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 56. 4x for Palo Alto Networks, Inc. — 45. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for TENB: 29. 7% to $27. 94.

08

Which pays a better dividend — INTZ or PANW or FTNT or QLYS 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.

09

Is INTZ or PANW or FTNT or QLYS or TENB better for a retirement portfolio?

For long-horizon retirement investors, Fortinet, Inc.

(FTNT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 01), +1680% 10Y return). Intrusion Inc. (INTZ) carries a higher beta of 2. 40 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (FTNT: +1680%, INTZ: -88. 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.

10

What are the main differences between INTZ and PANW and FTNT and QLYS 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: INTZ is a small-cap high-growth stock; PANW is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; FTNT is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; QLYS is a small-cap deep-value 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.

Stocks Like

INTZ

Quality Business

  • Sector: Technology
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Gross Margin > 45%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

PANW

Steady Growth Compounder

  • Sector: Technology
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 7%
  • Net Margin > 7%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

FTNT

High-Growth Quality Leader

  • Sector: Technology
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 10%
  • Net Margin > 16%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

QLYS

Quality Mega-Cap Compounder

  • Sector: Technology
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 5%
  • Net Margin > 17%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

TENB

Quality Business

  • Sector: Technology
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 5%
  • Gross Margin > 46%
Run This Screen
Custom Screen

Beat Both

Find stocks that outperform INTZ and PANW and FTNT and QLYS and TENB on the metrics below

Revenue Growth>
%
(INTZ: -11.6% · PANW: 14.9%)

You Might Also Compare

Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.