Software - Services
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
NTSK vs CRWD vs ZS vs S
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Software - Infrastructure
Software - Infrastructure
Software - Infrastructure
NTSK vs CRWD vs ZS vs S — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Software - Services | Software - Infrastructure | Software - Infrastructure | Software - Infrastructure |
| Market Cap | $921M | $138.38B | $23.47B | $4.96B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $709M | $4.81B | $3.00B | $1.00B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-679M | $-183M | $-68M | $-451M |
| Gross Margin | 68.1% | 74.9% | 76.6% | 74.1% |
| Operating Margin | -92.0% | -5.4% | -4.8% | -32.1% |
| Forward P/E | — | 112.2x | 36.4x | 82.9x |
| Total Debt | $755M | $820M | $1.80B | $0.00 |
| Cash & Equiv. | $471M | $5.23B | $2.39B | $170M |
NTSK vs CRWD vs ZS vs S — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| CrowdStrike Holding… (CRWD) | 100 | 217.3 | +117.3% |
| Zscaler, Inc. (ZS) | 100 | 67.7 | -32.3% |
| SentinelOne, Inc. (S) | 100 | 37.0 | -63.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NTSK vs CRWD vs ZS vs S
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NTSK is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth is your priority.
- 31.7% revenue growth vs CRWD's 21.7%
CRWD is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 8.4% 10Y total return vs ZS's 342.9%
- +27.2% vs NTSK's -51.9%
ZS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- beta 0.93
- Rev growth 23.3%, EPS growth 30.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 34.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.93, Low D/E 99.9%, current ratio 2.01x
- Beta 0.93, current ratio 2.01x
S lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 31.7% revenue growth vs CRWD's 21.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (36.4x vs 82.9x) | |
| Quality / Margins | -2.3% margin vs NTSK's -95.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.93 vs NTSK's 2.04, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +27.2% vs NTSK's -51.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -1.0% ROA vs NTSK's -53.1%, ROIC -8.4% vs -199.8% |
NTSK vs CRWD vs ZS vs S — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
NTSK vs CRWD vs ZS vs S — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ZS leads in 3 of 6 categories
CRWD leads 1 • NTSK leads 0 • S leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ZS leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CRWD is the larger business by revenue, generating $4.8B annually — 6.8x NTSK's $709M. ZS is the more profitable business, keeping -2.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NTSK's -95.8%. On growth, ZS holds the edge at +25.9% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $709M | $4.8B | $3.0B | $1.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$627M | $22M | -$52M | -$283M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$679M | -$183M | -$68M | -$451M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $15M | $1.2B | $944M | $58M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +68.1% | +74.9% | +76.6% | +74.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -92.0% | -5.4% | -4.8% | -32.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -95.8% | -3.8% | -2.3% | -45.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +2.1% | +25.8% | +31.4% | +5.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +23.3% | +25.9% | +20.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +140.5% | -3.2% | -50.0% |
Valuation Metrics
ZS leads this category, winning 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $921M | $138.4B | $23.5B | $5.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.2B | $134.0B | $22.9B | $4.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -3.40x | -840.28x | -541.37x | -11.49x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 112.20x | 36.43x | 82.89x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 1117.13x | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.30x | 28.76x | 8.78x | 4.95x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 118.86x | 31.52x | 12.54x | 3.62x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 60.77x | 105.62x | 32.30x | 65.28x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ZS leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ZS delivers a -3.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-3 in annual profit, vs $-3 for NTSK. CRWD carries lower financial leverage with a 0.18x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NTSK's 3.88x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NTSK scores 5/9 vs S's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -3.5% | -4.6% | -3.1% | -29.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -53.1% | -1.9% | -1.0% | -18.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -199.8% | -193.7% | -8.4% | -17.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -91.7% | -2.7% | -4.6% | -18.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 3 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 3.88x | 0.18x | 1.00x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $284M | -$4.4B | -$592M | -$170M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $471M | $5.2B | $2.4B | $170M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $755M | $820M | $1.8B | $0 |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -6.06x | 8.97x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CRWD leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CRWD five years ago would be worth $28,857 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,704 for S. Over the past 12 months, CRWD leads with a +27.2% total return vs NTSK's -51.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CRWD at 61.3% vs NTSK's -21.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -36.0% | +20.4% | -33.7% | +7.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -51.9% | +27.2% | -39.5% | -21.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -51.9% | +319.4% | +27.8% | -10.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -51.9% | +188.6% | -10.9% | -63.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -51.9% | +841.7% | +342.9% | -63.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -21.7% | +61.3% | +8.5% | -3.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CRWD and ZS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ZS is the less volatile stock with a 0.93 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NTSK's 2.04 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CRWD currently trades 96.3% from its 52-week high vs NTSK's 38.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.04x | 1.33x | 0.93x | 1.25x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $27.99 | $566.90 | $336.99 | $21.40 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $7.67 | $342.72 | $114.63 | $11.81 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +38.6% | +96.3% | +43.4% | +73.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 61.5 | 76.3 | 57.5 | 65.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 4.6M | 3.5M | 2.6M | 7.6M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NTSK as "Buy", CRWD as "Buy", ZS as "Buy", S as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 89.6% upside for ZS (target: $277) vs -4.1% for CRWD (target: $524).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $19.80 | $523.58 | $277.18 | $18.68 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 13 | 65 | 52 | 34 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +4.0% |
ZS leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). CRWD leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
NTSK vs CRWD vs ZS vs S: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NTSK or CRWD or ZS or S a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Netskope, Inc.
Class A Common Stock (NTSK) is the stronger pick with 31. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 21. 7% for CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc. (CRWD). Analysts rate Netskope, Inc. Class A Common Stock (NTSK) a "Buy" — based on 13 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 is the better long-term investment — NTSK or CRWD or ZS or S?
Over the past 5 years, CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc.
(CRWD) delivered a total return of +188. 6%, compared to -63. 0% for SentinelOne, Inc. (S). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CRWD returned +841. 7% versus S's -63. 0%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — NTSK or CRWD or ZS or S?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Zscaler, Inc.
(ZS) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 93β versus Netskope, Inc. Class A Common Stock's 2. 04β — meaning NTSK is approximately 121% more volatile than ZS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc. (CRWD) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 18% versus 4% for Netskope, Inc. Class A Common Stock — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — NTSK or CRWD or ZS or S?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Netskope, Inc.
Class A Common Stock (NTSK) is pulling ahead at 31. 7% versus 21. 7% for CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc. (CRWD). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Zscaler, Inc. grew EPS 30. 8% year-over-year, compared to -725. 9% for CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ZS leads at 34. 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.
05Which has better profit margins — NTSK or CRWD or ZS or S?
Zscaler, Inc.
(ZS) is the more profitable company, earning -1. 6% net margin versus -95. 8% for Netskope, Inc. Class A Common Stock — meaning it keeps -1. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CRWD leads at -3. 4% versus -92. 0% for NTSK. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ZS leads at 76. 9%, 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.
06Is NTSK or CRWD or ZS or S more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Zscaler, Inc.
(ZS) trades at 36. 4x forward P/E versus 112. 2x for CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc. — 75. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ZS: 89. 6% to $277. 18.
07Which pays a better dividend — NTSK or CRWD or ZS or S?
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.
08Is NTSK or CRWD or ZS or S better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Zscaler, Inc.
(ZS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 93), +342. 9% 10Y return). Netskope, Inc. Class A Common Stock (NTSK) carries a higher beta of 2. 04 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ZS: +342. 9%, NTSK: -51. 9%), 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.
09What are the main differences between NTSK and CRWD and ZS and S?
Both stocks operate in the Technology sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
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.