ay holds the cleaner structural position, with profitability as the main driver and stability adding further support. The market setup is currently leaning toward Warehouses De Pauw, which does not confirm the structural lead. That leaves a split case: the structural lead stays with ay, but the market is not currently confirming it.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
The clearest separation starts in profitability, but stability adds another real layer to the result. The overall score gap is 13 points in favour of Corpay, Inc..
This comparison is anchored in long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.
This level of similarity points to a meaningful structural match, though not a tight one.
The strongest overlap appears in margin consistency and revenue stability.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
Score differences across key dimensions.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
The setup remains mixed because the stronger profile and the more supportive price setup do not sit on the same side.
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
Capital efficiency adds support, with a 6.7-point ROIC advantage.
Warehouses De Pauw SA still carries lower volatility exposure — that difference is real enough to prevent the comparison from becoming one-sided.
Profitability is the clearest driver, and stability also supports Corpay, Inc.'s broader structural position.
Break down the CPAY vs WDP.BR comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how CPAY and WDP.BR 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.