Compare price, profitability, solvency, and SEC-reported financials side by side—before deciding which assumptions deserve a closer look.
Decision snapshot: CTAS stock price vs DDOG: inconclusive Relative valuation is incomplete for this pair. Review the available filing metrics before drawing a conclusion.
Quick read
Each company valued on the other's multiple, then compared with the market price.
Implied fair value · at DDOG's multiple
Needs DDOG P/E.
Implied fair value · at CTAS's multiple
Needs CTAS P/E.
Price unavailable
Metric by metric
Where each company leads, and how wide the gap is.
Growth lag
Reported gross margin
Operating income + D&A
Lower is better
Not comparable
Lower leverage
Statements
Annual statements in reported currencies, with calculations and source evidence.
Values retain reported currencies and share bases. Select a figure to inspect its period, calculation and filing inputs. Differences require compatible units and periods.
Explore enterprise value and market valuation multiples in the valuation sections.
Trendline
Nine period-end years of reported revenue, earnings, and margins. Periods and currencies are shown with the data.
Price framework
USD market cap plus reported borrowing debt, less cash and equivalents. This EV proxy excludes investments, preferred stock and noncontrolling-interest adjustments.
Complete market value, debt and cash evidence is required for enterprise value.
Complete market value, debt and cash evidence is required for enterprise value.
Price framework
The same filing-backed model used on each company's valuation page, with company-specific inputs and calculated scenarios.
Cintas Corporation · implied price per share
Debt and bridge-cash inputs are required to translate enterprise value into equity value.
Datadog, Inc. · implied price per share
Debt and bridge-cash inputs are required to translate enterprise value into equity value.
Balance sheet health
Inspect reported liquidity and leverage alongside historical financial-health checks.
Financial strength on a 0–9 scale.
Bankruptcy-risk signal from balance sheet and earnings power.
Not enough data to score either balance sheet.
Cash excludes investments. EBITDA is an operating-income-plus-D&A proxy. Missing borrowing categories remain unavailable; select a value to inspect its inputs.
Comparable set
Where the pair sits against the wider comparable set.
Keep comparing
Open adjacent comparisons from the same industry to pressure-test the read across multiple pairs.
UNIFIRST CORP
CTAS vs UNF
ABM INDUSTRIES INC /DE/
CTAS vs ABM
Aramark
CTAS vs ARMK
W.W. GRAINGER, INC.
CTAS vs GWW
INTUIT INC.
CTAS vs INTU
IRON MOUNTAIN INC
CTAS vs IRM
PagerDuty, Inc.
CTAS vs PD
Elastic N.V.
CTAS vs ESTC
Dynatrace, Inc.
CTAS vs DT
Zscaler, Inc.
CTAS vs ZS
Cloudflare, Inc.
CTAS vs NET
LLM-powered synthesis
An explanation of the financial evidence. Check its snapshot date against the figures above.
This explanation uses an earlier data snapshot or evidence version. Review its generation date and the current figures, or refresh after signing in.
If you believe DDOG’s growth profile is a valid basis for valuing CTAS at an extreme DDOG-implied multiple, then you could justify staying constructive; otherwise, reduce exposure or avoid adding because CTAS already trades near the top of its historical range and far above DCF value.
The valuation gap is enormous: DDOG-implied price of $3,616.37 versus CTAS at $200.41 implies 1,704.5% upside, but that output is mechanically inconsistent with the fundamentals shown. On the supplied multiples, CTAS is already expensive versus its own historical band and DCF range, so the comparison does not justify a bullish rerating.
Supporting Metrics
