Compare price, profitability, solvency, and SEC-reported financials side by side—before deciding which assumptions deserve a closer look.
Decision snapshot: UPWK stock price vs LYFT: 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 LYFT's multiple
Needs LYFT P/E.
Implied fair value · at UPWK's multiple
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
Eight 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.
UPWORK INC. · implied price per share
Debt and bridge-cash inputs are required to translate enterprise value into equity value.
Lyft, Inc. · implied price per share
Five annual free-cash-flow observations are required for the filing-backed baseline.
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.
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.
Cash excludes investments. EBITDA is an operating-income-plus-D&A proxy. Missing borrowing categories remain unavailable; select a value to inspect its inputs.
Edwyn research
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 UPWK can sustain its 16.4% operating margin and 19.1% ROIC while closing the gap toward its DCF range, then UPWK is the better-quality hold because the business fundamentals are materially stronger than LYFT’s despite the current price sitting below the DCF floor.
On a simple P/E basis, UPWK trades at 23.6x versus LYFT at 2.4x, which would normally suggest UPWK is expensive relative to LYFT. However, LYFT’s very low earnings multiple is not a clean quality signal given its weak operating profitability and extreme EV/EBITDA of 266.3x, so the apparent discount/premium relationship is mixed rather than straightforward.
Supporting Metrics
