Home Compare AOF.DE vs FTNT
Stock Comparison · Single-driver result

ATOSS Software vs Fortinet: Which Stock Looks Stronger in 2026?

ATOSS Software SE holds the cleaner structural position, with growth as the main driver and profitability adding further support. Fortinet still has the edge on growth, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. In the market, Fortinet carries the stronger setup — intact trend against ATOSS Software SE's broken trend. That leaves a split case: the structural lead stays with ATOSS Software SE, but the market is not currently confirming it.

The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels. Peer scores are normalised within each company's primary universe (AOF.DE: HDAX, FTNT: Nasdaq 100).

Updated 2026-07-05

Growth points more clearly toward Fortinet, Inc., even if the broader score still leans toward ATOSS Software SE.

Trajectory Similarity
0.75
Similar
Peer-set rank: #6
within ATOSS Software SE's functional peer set

This comparison is anchored in long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.

The pair sits on a clearly comparable long-term path, though it is not a near-twin match.

The clearest structural overlap shows up in margin trend and recent revenue growth.

Similarity drivers
margin trendrecent revenue growth
How to read the score
0.85–1.00 · Very similar0.70–0.84 · Similar0.55–0.69 · Moderately similarbelow 0.55 · Loose match
Peer-Relative Score
AOF.DE
ATOSS Software SE
54
Peer-Score
Signal qualitylow
Peer basis: HDAX
vs
FTNT
Fortinet, Inc.
48
Peer-Score
Signal qualitylow
Peer basis: Nasdaq 100

Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.

The clearest separation appears in growth.

Dimension spread: AOF.DE vs FTNT Profitability 63 36 Stability 48 52 Valuation 59 40 Growth 36 77 AOF.DE FTNT
Gap Ranking
#1 Growth +41
#2 Profitability +27
#3 Valuation +19
#4 Stability +4
Price Setup

Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.

Price setup map for AOF.DE and FTNT Stronger + cheaper Stronger + richer Weaker + cheaper Weaker + richer AOF.DEFTNT Relative valuation Structural strength

Structure stays fairly close here, while current pricing still looks more supportive for ATOSS Software SE.

Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.

Entry today — historical context

Where AOF.DE and FTNT each sit in their own 5-year price and valuation history.

BASED ON 5-YEAR HISTORY AOF.DE Lower · below norm 0th 50th 100th 82 pct gap FTNT Elevated · above norm 0th 50th 100th 16th 99th
Today AOF.DE sits in the lower portion of its own 5-year history (16th percentile), while FTNT sits higher in its own history (99th). Within each stock's own 5-year context, AOF.DE is at a historically more favourable entry position than FTNT. This reflects entry timing, not which company is structurally stronger — peer-relative analysis is a separate question addressed above.

Describes historical entry positioning only. Descriptive — not investment advice.

Relative Position vs Comparable Companies
Growth
On growth, Fortinet, Inc. ranks near the top of the group; ATOSS Software SE sits in the weaker half.
Profitability
ATOSS Software SE sits in the stronger part of the group on profitability, while Fortinet, Inc. is closer to mid-pack.
Growth — Dominant Gap
AOF.DE
36
FTNT
77
Gap+41in favour of FTNT

The current lead is backed by a stronger multi-year growth trajectory.

What keeps the gap from being one-sided

On the market side, Fortinet carries the stronger trend while ATOSS Software SE's trend has broken — the market setup does not confirm the structural advantage.

What this means for the comparison

Growth is the clearest driver of the lead, with profitability adding further support — though growth still provides a real counterweight.

Explore full peer positioning in AssetNext

Break down the AOF.DE vs FTNT comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.

Explore full breakdown →
Other comparisons with conflicting dimension signals

Explore how AOF.DE and FTNT each compare against other companies in their peer groups.

Rule-based, descriptive analysis only. Derived from peer percentile dimensions. Not investment advice. Peer groups are determined algorithmically based on structural similarity — not by sector classification alone.

How AssetNext Peer Scores Work

AssetNext scores reflect each company's structural position within its functional peer group — not a ranking against all stocks simultaneously. Peers are identified by similarity across eight financial dimensions, including revenue growth trajectory, margin structure, capital intensity, and earnings stability. A score of 75 means the company ranks in the top quartile within its own peer group, not the entire market.

Four dimension scores drive the overall peer score: Growth (revenue trajectory and expansion dynamics), Quality (margin structure and capital efficiency), Valuation (peer-relative pricing on standard multiples), and Stability (earnings consistency and financial predictability). Each dimension is scored 0–100 relative to the peer group, then combined into an overall peer score using equal weighting.

Because scores are peer-relative, the same company can have slightly different scores in different index universes. On comparison pages, both companies are shown within their shared peer universe wherever possible — so the scores are directly comparable. The peer basis is stated on each score card.

Scores are recalculated periodically as underlying financial data is updated. All analysis is descriptive and rule-based — AssetNext describes structural realities and never issues buy, sell or hold recommendations.