GDYN Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

ASGN has a net margin of 4.51% compared to Grid Dynamics Holdings's net margin of 4.31%. Grid Dynamics Holdings's return on equity of 0.98% beat ASGN's return on equity of 9.61%.

Grid Dynamics Holdings has a consensus price target of $26.00, signalling upside risk potential of 64.45%. On the other hand ASGN has an analysts' consensus of $93.33 which suggests that it could grow by 48.1%. Given that Grid Dynamics Holdings has higher upside potential than ASGN, analysts believe Grid Dynamics Holdings is more attractive than ASGN.

Grid Dynamics Holdings has a beta of 1.100, which suggesting that the stock is 10.01% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison ASGN has a beta of 1.338, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 33.842%.

Grid Dynamics Holdings has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. ASGN offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Grid Dynamics Holdings pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. ASGN pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Grid Dynamics Holdings quarterly revenues are $100.3M, which are smaller than ASGN quarterly revenues of $985M. Grid Dynamics Holdings's net income of $4.5M is lower than ASGN's net income of $42.4M. Notably, Grid Dynamics Holdings's price-to-earnings ratio is 395.25x while ASGN's PE ratio is 16.41x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Grid Dynamics Holdings is 3.63x versus 0.70x for ASGN. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Castellum has a net margin of 4.51% compared to Grid Dynamics Holdings's net margin of -26.62%. Grid Dynamics Holdings's return on equity of 0.98% beat Castellum's return on equity of -71.22%.

Grid Dynamics Holdings has a consensus price target of $26.00, signalling upside risk potential of 64.45%. On the other hand Castellum has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could grow by 11.65%. Given that Grid Dynamics Holdings has higher upside potential than Castellum, analysts believe Grid Dynamics Holdings is more attractive than Castellum.

Grid Dynamics Holdings has a beta of 1.100, which suggesting that the stock is 10.01% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Castellum has a beta of -3.380, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 438.042%.

Grid Dynamics Holdings has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Castellum offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Grid Dynamics Holdings pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Castellum pays out -1.2% of its earnings as a dividend.

Grid Dynamics Holdings quarterly revenues are $100.3M, which are larger than Castellum quarterly revenues of $10.3M. Grid Dynamics Holdings's net income of $4.5M is higher than Castellum's net income of -$2.7M. Notably, Grid Dynamics Holdings's price-to-earnings ratio is 395.25x while Castellum's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Grid Dynamics Holdings is 3.63x versus 1.30x for Castellum. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Diebold Nixdorf has a net margin of 4.51% compared to Grid Dynamics Holdings's net margin of 0.57%. Grid Dynamics Holdings's return on equity of 0.98% beat Diebold Nixdorf's return on equity of -1.61%.

Grid Dynamics Holdings has a consensus price target of $26.00, signalling upside risk potential of 64.45%. On the other hand Diebold Nixdorf has an analysts' consensus of $70.00 which suggests that it could grow by 60.81%. Given that Grid Dynamics Holdings has higher upside potential than Diebold Nixdorf, analysts believe Grid Dynamics Holdings is more attractive than Diebold Nixdorf.

Grid Dynamics Holdings has a beta of 1.100, which suggesting that the stock is 10.01% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Diebold Nixdorf has a beta of 0.000, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 100%.

Grid Dynamics Holdings has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Diebold Nixdorf offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Grid Dynamics Holdings pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Diebold Nixdorf pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Grid Dynamics Holdings quarterly revenues are $100.3M, which are smaller than Diebold Nixdorf quarterly revenues of $988.9M. Grid Dynamics Holdings's net income of $4.5M is lower than Diebold Nixdorf's net income of $5.6M. Notably, Grid Dynamics Holdings's price-to-earnings ratio is 395.25x while Diebold Nixdorf's PE ratio is 356.62x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Grid Dynamics Holdings is 3.63x versus 0.44x for Diebold Nixdorf. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

EPAM Systems has a net margin of 4.51% compared to Grid Dynamics Holdings's net margin of 8.28%. Grid Dynamics Holdings's return on equity of 0.98% beat EPAM Systems's return on equity of 12.96%.

Grid Dynamics Holdings has a consensus price target of $26.00, signalling upside risk potential of 64.45%. On the other hand EPAM Systems has an analysts' consensus of $254.92 which suggests that it could grow by 50.9%. Given that Grid Dynamics Holdings has higher upside potential than EPAM Systems, analysts believe Grid Dynamics Holdings is more attractive than EPAM Systems.

Grid Dynamics Holdings has a beta of 1.100, which suggesting that the stock is 10.01% more volatile than S&P 500. In comparison EPAM Systems has a beta of 1.606, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 60.614%.

Grid Dynamics Holdings has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. EPAM Systems offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Grid Dynamics Holdings pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. EPAM Systems pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Grid Dynamics Holdings quarterly revenues are $100.3M, which are smaller than EPAM Systems quarterly revenues of $1.2B. Grid Dynamics Holdings's net income of $4.5M is lower than EPAM Systems's net income of $103.3M. Notably, Grid Dynamics Holdings's price-to-earnings ratio is 395.25x while EPAM Systems's PE ratio is 21.55x. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Grid Dynamics Holdings is 3.63x versus 2.07x for EPAM Systems. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.