Nagarro SE holds the cleaner structural position, with growth as the main driver and profitability adding further support. In the market, Rubis carries the stronger setup — intact trend against Nagarro SE's broken trend. That leaves a split case: the structural lead stays with Nagarro SE, but the market is not currently confirming it.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
Growth still does most of the heavy lifting in this comparison. Nagarro SE leads by 9 points on the overall comparison score.
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.
The match is driven mainly by capital structure and margin consistency.
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 is mixed: neither company clearly combines the stronger profile with the more supportive price setup.
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
One company is still expanding while the other is contracting, which creates a very wide growth split.
On the market side, Rubis carries the stronger trend while Nagarro SE's trend has broken — the market setup does not confirm the structural advantage.
Growth is the clearest driver, and profitability also supports Nagarro SE's broader structural position.
Break down the NA9.DE vs RUI.PA comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how NA9.DE and RUI.PA 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.