Software - Infrastructure
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
RDWR vs PANW vs FTNT vs FFIV vs CSCO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Software - Infrastructure
Software - Infrastructure
Software - Infrastructure
Communication Equipment
RDWR vs PANW vs FTNT vs FFIV vs CSCO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Software - Infrastructure | Software - Infrastructure | Software - Infrastructure | Software - Infrastructure | Communication Equipment |
| Market Cap | $1.22B | $138.16B | $79.89B | $19.50B | $364.95B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $302M | $9.89B | $7.11B | $3.22B | $59.05B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $20M | $1.28B | $1.95B | $708M | $11.08B |
| Gross Margin | 80.7% | 73.5% | 80.7% | 81.9% | 64.4% |
| Operating Margin | 3.8% | 14.4% | 31.1% | 24.6% | 23.0% |
| Forward P/E | 25.5x | 53.3x | 36.3x | 20.9x | 22.2x |
| Total Debt | $17M | $338M | $996M | $493M | $29.64B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $105M | $2.27B | $2.50B | $1.34B | $9.47B |
RDWR vs PANW vs FTNT vs FFIV vs CSCO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Radware Ltd. (RDWR) | 100 | 119.1 | +19.1% |
| Palo Alto Networks,… (PANW) | 100 | 501.2 | +401.2% |
| Fortinet, Inc. (FTNT) | 100 | 387.8 | +287.8% |
| F5, Inc. (FFIV) | 100 | 238.1 | +138.1% |
| Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) | 100 | 192.7 | +92.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: RDWR vs PANW vs FTNT vs FFIV vs CSCO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
RDWR is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.99, Low D/E 4.4%, current ratio 1.63x
- Beta 0.99, current ratio 1.63x
PANW ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 14.9%, EPS growth -56.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 18.8%
- 14.9% revenue growth vs CSCO's 5.3%
FTNT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and valuation efficiency is your priority.
- 15.8% 10Y total return vs PANW's 7.5%
- PEG 1.09 vs RDWR's 1.45
- 27.5% margin vs RDWR's 6.7%
- 19.4% ROA vs RDWR's 3.1%
FFIV is the clearest fit if your priority is value.
- Lower P/E (20.9x vs 22.2x)
CSCO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.92, yield 1.7%
- Beta 0.92 vs FFIV's 1.03
- 1.7% yield; 15-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
- +57.5% vs FTNT's +1.2%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 14.9% revenue growth vs CSCO's 5.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (20.9x vs 22.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.5% margin vs RDWR's 6.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.92 vs FFIV's 1.03 | |
| Dividends | 1.7% yield; 15-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +57.5% vs FTNT's +1.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 19.4% ROA vs RDWR's 3.1% |
RDWR vs PANW vs FTNT vs FFIV vs CSCO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
RDWR vs PANW vs FTNT vs FFIV vs CSCO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
FTNT leads in 1 of 6 categories
FFIV leads 1 • RDWR leads 0 • PANW leads 0 • CSCO leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FTNT 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 — 195.6x RDWR's $302M. FTNT is the more profitable business, keeping 27.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to RDWR's 6.7%. On growth, FTNT holds the edge at +20.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $302M | $9.9B | $7.1B | $3.2B | $59.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $23M | $1.9B | $2.3B | $867M | $16.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $20M | $1.3B | $2.0B | $708M | $11.1B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $43M | $4.1B | $2.4B | $963M | $12.8B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +80.7% | +73.5% | +80.7% | +81.9% | +64.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +3.8% | +14.4% | +31.1% | +24.6% | +23.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +6.7% | +13.0% | +27.5% | +22.0% | +18.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +14.2% | +41.1% | +34.3% | +29.9% | +21.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +9.9% | +14.9% | +20.1% | +11.0% | +9.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +131.7% | +57.9% | +28.6% | +4.0% | +29.5% |
Valuation Metrics
FFIV leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 29.2x trailing earnings, FFIV trades at a 76% valuation discount to PANW's 122.8x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), FTNT offers better value at 1.34x vs RDWR's 3.58x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.2B | $138.2B | $79.9B | $19.5B | $365.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.1B | $136.2B | $78.4B | $18.6B | $385.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 63.02x | 122.83x | 44.43x | 29.24x | 36.14x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 25.54x | 53.30x | 36.28x | 20.93x | 22.18x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 3.58x | — | 1.34x | 1.56x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 49.18x | 85.88x | 35.09x | 21.73x | 26.34x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 4.05x | 14.98x | 11.75x | 6.31x | 6.44x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.24x | 17.82x | 65.26x | 5.64x | 7.87x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 29.45x | 39.82x | 35.89x | 21.51x | 27.46x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — PANW and FTNT each lead in 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
FTNT delivers a 155.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $156 in annual profit, vs $5 for RDWR. PANW carries lower financial leverage with a 0.04x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FTNT's 0.81x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FFIV scores 8/9 vs PANW's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +5.3% | +13.6% | +155.7% | +19.9% | +23.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.1% | +5.1% | +19.4% | +11.2% | +9.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +3.0% | +17.1% | — | +21.8% | +13.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.5% | +8.9% | +37.7% | +17.3% | +13.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 4 | 7 | 8 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.04x | 0.04x | 0.81x | 0.14x | 0.63x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$88M | -$1.9B | -$1.5B | -$852M | $20.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $105M | $2.3B | $2.5B | $1.3B | $9.5B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $17M | $338M | $996M | $493M | $29.6B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 1559.00x | 214.35x | — | 9.64x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — FTNT and FFIV each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in PANW five years ago would be worth $34,443 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $10,190 for RDWR. Over the past 12 months, CSCO leads with a +57.5% total return vs FTNT's +1.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors FFIV at 36.7% vs RDWR's 13.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +19.3% | +9.6% | +38.6% | +34.4% | +22.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +26.5% | +4.5% | +1.2% | +29.0% | +57.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +46.0% | +105.2% | +63.4% | +155.5% | +109.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +1.9% | +244.4% | +154.9% | +87.2% | +87.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +164.8% | +746.7% | +1584.4% | +238.7% | +301.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +13.4% | +27.1% | +17.8% | +36.7% | +27.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — FFIV and CSCO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CSCO is the less volatile stock with a 0.92 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FFIV's 1.03 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FFIV currently trades 99.3% from its 52-week high vs PANW's 87.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.99x | 1.02x | 1.02x | 1.03x | 0.92x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $31.57 | $223.61 | $112.39 | $347.47 | $94.72 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $21.29 | $139.57 | $70.12 | $223.76 | $59.07 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +89.8% | +87.9% | +96.1% | +99.3% | +97.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 54.5 | 61.6 | 64.3 | 69.3 | 63.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 228K | 7.5M | 5.8M | 701K | 18.9M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: RDWR as "Hold", PANW as "Buy", FTNT as "Hold", FFIV as "Hold", CSCO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 5.8% upside for PANW (target: $208) vs -19.6% for FTNT (target: $87). CSCO is the only dividend payer here at 1.75% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $25.00 | $207.85 | $86.81 | $310.67 | $96.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 14 | 86 | 68 | 61 | 73 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | +1.7% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | — | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | $1.61 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.9% | 0.0% | +2.9% | +2.6% | +2.0% |
FTNT leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). FFIV leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 3 tied.
RDWR vs PANW vs FTNT vs FFIV vs CSCO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is RDWR or PANW or FTNT or FFIV or CSCO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Palo Alto Networks, Inc.
(PANW) is the stronger pick with 14. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 3% for Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO). F5, Inc. (FFIV) offers the better valuation at 29. 2x trailing P/E (20. 9x 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.
02Which has the better valuation — RDWR or PANW or FTNT or FFIV or CSCO?
On trailing P/E, F5, Inc.
(FFIV) is the cheapest at 29. 2x versus Palo Alto Networks, Inc. at 122. 8x. On forward P/E, F5, Inc. is actually cheaper at 20. 9x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Fortinet, Inc. wins at 1. 09x versus Radware Ltd. 's 1. 45x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — RDWR or PANW or FTNT or FFIV or CSCO?
Over the past 5 years, Palo Alto Networks, Inc.
(PANW) delivered a total return of +244. 4%, compared to +1. 9% for Radware Ltd. (RDWR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FTNT returned +1584% versus RDWR's +164. 8%. 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 — RDWR or PANW or FTNT or FFIV or CSCO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Cisco Systems, Inc.
(CSCO) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 92β versus F5, Inc. 's 1. 03β — meaning FFIV is approximately 12% more volatile than CSCO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Palo Alto Networks, Inc. (PANW) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 4% versus 81% for Fortinet, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — RDWR or PANW or FTNT or FFIV or CSCO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Palo Alto Networks, Inc.
(PANW) is pulling ahead at 14. 9% versus 5. 3% for Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Radware Ltd. grew EPS 221. 4% 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.
06Which has better profit margins — RDWR or PANW or FTNT or FFIV or CSCO?
Fortinet, Inc.
(FTNT) is the more profitable company, earning 27. 3% net margin versus 6. 7% for Radware Ltd. — meaning it keeps 27. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FTNT leads at 30. 6% versus 3. 8% for RDWR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FFIV leads at 81. 4%, 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 RDWR or PANW or FTNT or FFIV 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, Fortinet, Inc. (FTNT) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 09x versus Radware Ltd. 's 1. 45x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, F5, Inc. (FFIV) trades at 20. 9x forward P/E versus 53. 3x for Palo Alto Networks, Inc. — 32. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PANW: 5. 8% to $207. 85.
08Which pays a better dividend — RDWR or PANW or FTNT or FFIV or CSCO?
In this comparison, CSCO (1.
7% yield) pays a dividend. RDWR, PANW, FTNT, FFIV do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is RDWR or PANW or FTNT or FFIV or CSCO 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. 02), +1584% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FTNT: +1584%, RDWR: +164. 8%), 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 RDWR and PANW and FTNT and FFIV 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.
CSCO pays a dividend while RDWR, PANW, FTNT, FFIV 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.