PTC holds the cleaner structural position, with the lead spread across growth and profitability. ATOSS Software SE still has the edge on profitability, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. Both sides have seen trend damage — neither carries a clear market edge right now. With both trends damaged, the structural comparison carries most of the weight here.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
Growth drives the lead, while profitability keeps the result from looking one-sided. The overall score gap is 8 points in favour of PTC Inc..
Both operate in: Software - Application
This comparison is based on industry proximity, not on functional trajectory similarity. AOF.DE and PTC share the same industry classification.
For a similarity-based comparison, see how ATOSS Software SE and PTC each position within their functional peer groups in AssetNext.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
The largest gaps do not all point in the same direction.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
PTC Inc. and ATOSS Software SE look relatively close on structure, but the price setup still leans toward PTC Inc..
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
Earnings growth is one contributing factor within the growth lead.
Profitability still favours ATOSS Software SE, with a 6.3-point operating margin advantage keeping the comparison from looking fully resolved.
The growth lead is clear, but pricing and profitability still pull in the other direction — the result holds, but not without friction.
Break down the AOF.DE vs PTC comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how AOF.DE and PTC 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.
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.
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.