Guidewire Software holds the cleaner structural position, with stability as the main driver and profitability adding further support. In the market, Exact Sciences carries the stronger setup — intact trend against Guidewire Software's broken trend. That leaves a split case: the structural lead stays with Guidewire Software, but the market is not currently confirming it.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
The lead is spread across stability and profitability, rather than sitting in one isolated gap. The overall score gap is 11 points in favour of Guidewire Software, Inc..
This pair is matched through long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.
A moderate similarity means the pair is structurally comparable, but not a near-twin trajectory match.
Most of the shared profile comes through revenue growth trajectory and investment intensity.
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.
Guidewire Software, Inc. occupies the cheaper side of the setup map, although Exact Sciences Corp still holds the stronger structural profile.
Valuation position uses Forward P/E and peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
The clearest distance comes from a steadier profile over time.
On the market side, Exact Sciences carries the stronger trend while Guidewire Software's trend has broken — the market setup does not confirm the structural advantage.
Stability is the clearest driver, and profitability also supports Guidewire Software, Inc.'s broader structural position.
Break down the EXAS vs GWRE comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how EXAS and GWRE 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.