Bringing the fundamentals into focus…
Back to EPAM Systems, Inc.
How EPAM Systems, Inc. stacks up
EPAM · against 274 other Technology companies of similar size
Growth
50/ 100
Below the middle of the pack.
Ranked #170 of 275 · scores higher than 37% of peers
Bars: peers in each 10-point band of the growth score32 peers with a growth score of 50–59, including EPAM · Click a bar to see the companies
Why growth scores 50?
Weighted metrics compared with all Technology companies.Its metrics sit close to the Technology norm.
- Earnings per share growth is close to the peer norm. Earnings per share growth: 8.1% vs peer median 11.1%
- 3-year revenue growth is close to the peer norm. 3-year revenue growth: 5.1% vs peer median 4.8%
- Revenue growth is close to the peer norm. Revenue growth: 10.8% vs peer median 8.5%
Metric by metric
Position: dot = EPAM, ranked from the worst peer (left) to the best (right); tick = middle, shaded = middle half of peers.| Metric | EPAM | Peer median | Better than | Position among peers | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue growthHigher is better · 277 reported | 10.8% | 12.0% | 43% | 33% | |
| Earnings per share growthHigher is better · 207 reported | 8.1% | 17.8% | 38% | 33% | |
| 3-year revenue growthHigher is better · 272 reported | 5.1% | 8.3% | 39% | 33% |
Ranking by growth score
Top 5 and the companies ranked around EPAM| Rank | Company | Market cap | Growth | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 37.0B CNY (≈$5.2B) | 100 | 65 | |
| 1 | 4.0B USD | 100 | 84 | |
| 3 | 37.9B CNY (≈$5.3B) | 99 | 58 | |
| 3 | 6.0B USD | 99 | 83 | |
| 3 | 3.8B USD | 99 | 74 | |
| 165 | 5.8B USD | 51 | 53 | |
| 165 | 7.4B USD | 51 | 42 | |
| 170 | 1.74T JPY (≈$11.9B) | 50 | 64 | |
| 170 | 5.6B USD | 50 | 82 | |
| 170 | 7.1B USD | 50 | 68 | |
| 170 | 6.8B USD | 50 | 52 | |
| 174 | 46.1B HKD (≈$5.9B) | 49 | 59 | |
| 174 | 5.7B USD | 49 | 60 | |
| 174 | 6.5B USD | 49 | 48 |
Scores are sector-relative percentiles from the latest snapshot, always calculated against the whole sector: narrowing the comparison group changes who you compare with, not the scores. Missing metrics are left out and the remaining weights rescaled. How we score