Which is better, CLS or FICO?

On the Buffett-Fit framework, Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO) currently grades higher than CLS — 85/100 (A grade) vs 52/100 (C). That said, "better" depends on which framework you trust — CLS wins on none; FICO wins on Warren Buffett, Benjamin Graham, Philip Fisher, Peter Lynch, Joel Greenblatt, Charlie Munger, and Terry Smith. The full pillar breakdown is on this page.

Should I buy CLS or FICO?

This page is an educational comparison, not investment advice. Both CLS and FICO are graded against the same Buffett 5-pillar framework (moat, earnings durability, management quality, financial health, valuation) plus six other documented investor frameworks. Read the side-by-side breakdown to see which one matches the criteria you care about most — and always do your own research before making any investment decision.

Is CLS better than FICO for value investing?

On the Buffett-style value-investing framework, FICO currently grades higher — 85/100 vs 52/100, a 33-point gap. The gap is driven by which pillars each stock passes; the table on this page shows moat, durability, management, financial health, and valuation side-by-side.

What's the difference between CLS and FICO on Warren Buffett's framework?

Both stocks are evaluated on the same five pillars: economic moat (durable competitive advantage), earnings durability (consistent profitability), management quality (capital allocation), financial health (conservative balance sheet), and valuation (margin of safety). CLS currently scores 52/100 (C grade); FICO scores 85/100 (A grade). The "Where each wins" section on this page breaks down which pillar each stock dominates.

Which has the stronger moat, CLS or FICO?

Moat strength is one of the five pillars in the Buffett-Fit score on this page. CLS and FICO are each scored on ROIC sustainability, gross-margin durability, and qualitative signals like brand strength, switching costs, network effects, and regulatory barriers. The pillar breakdown on this page shows the moat sub-score side-by-side so you can see which one has the more durable competitive advantage.

Which is more undervalued, CLS or FICO?

Valuation is one of the five Buffett-Fit pillars on this page. Both stocks are scored on owner-earnings yield, price-to-intrinsic-value vs the underlying compounding rate, and the margin of safety relative to a conservative DCF. The valuation sub-score in the table below tells you which one currently trades at a more attractive price relative to its underlying business quality.

Are CLS and FICO both Technology stocks?

Yes — both Celestica Inc. (CLS) and Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO) operate in the Technology sector. That makes this a direct sector-peer comparison, which is the apples-to-apples way to use the Buffett-Fit framework: the score weighs each stock against its sector's specific quality and valuation benchmarks (sector-relative bonus), so the cross-stock comparison isn't distorted by inter-sector base-rate differences.

Is this CLS vs FICO comparison investment advice?

No. This page is an educational pattern-match against documented public frameworks (Buffett, Graham, Fisher, Lynch, Greenblatt, Munger, Smith), not personalised investment advice. The scores reflect how closely each stock matches each framework's documented criteria — they are not buy/hold/sell recommendations. Always do your own research and consult a licensed financial adviser for personalised advice.

Stock comparison

Celestica

CLS$39.84BTechnology Market cap, Sector

Fair Isaac

FICO$28.53BTechnology Market cap, Sector

Overall winner

Fair Isaac

CLS 07 FICO

Wins on the combined sum of fit scores across all four strategies. Per-strategy breakdown below.

Scored across Buffett, Graham, Lynch and Greenblatt - plus a side-by-side metric table covering valuation, quality, growth and balance sheet.

Fit scores by strategy

CLS0wins

7winsFICO

Warren Buffett

52D

A85

Benjamin Graham

76B

A88

Philip Fisher

55D

A85

Peter Lynch

55D

B70

Joel Greenblatt

69C

A94

Charlie Munger

44F

A91

Terry Smith

38F

A95

Side-by-side metrics

Metric	CLS	FICO
Market cap	Winner: $39.84B	$28.53B
P/E (TTM)	43.6x	33.8x Winner
EV/EBIT	38.8x	30.9x Winner
ROIC (TTM)	29.23%	53.2% Winner
Gross margin	11.61%	84.16% Winner
Net margin	6.95%	33.67% Winner
Revenue CAGR 5y	Winner: 22.3%	10.89%
EPS CAGR 5y	Winner: 73.03%	18.48%
Debt / Equity	0.4x	- Winner
Dividend yield	0.0%	0.0%

Where each one wins

The metrics with the biggest gap between the two - sorted so the most decisive edges read first.

CLS leads on

EPS CAGR 5y73.03%vs 18.48%+75%
Revenue CAGR 5y22.3%vs 10.89%+51%
Market cap$39.84Bvs $28.53B+28%

FICO leads on

Debt / Equity-vs 0.4x+122%
Gross margin84.16%vs 11.61%+86%
Net margin33.67%vs 6.95%+79%
ROIC (TTM)53.2%vs 29.23%+45%

More like CLS

CLS vs FTNT CLS vs CAMS.BO CLS vs TNE.AX CLS vs 4071.T

More like FICO

FICO vs FTNT FICO vs CAMS.BO FICO vs TNE.AX FICO vs 4071.T

Read the full Buffett-Brain analysis for CLS Read the full Buffett-Brain analysis for FICO

Related on invest-like

Strongest Moat Highest ROIC Warren Buffett strategy Economic Moat

Key terms in this analysis

ROIC Free Cash Flow (FCF)Economic Moat P/E Ratio Margin of Safety Quality Score

Educational tool. Fit scores are deterministic projections from public financials onto each investor's published criteria - not personal recommendations or advice.

Stock comparison

Celestica

CLS$39.84BTechnology Market cap, Sector

Fair Isaac

FICO$28.53BTechnology Market cap, Sector

Overall winner

Fair Isaac

CLS 07 FICO

Wins on the combined sum of fit scores across all four strategies. Per-strategy breakdown below.

Scored across Buffett, Graham, Lynch and Greenblatt - plus a side-by-side metric table covering valuation, quality, growth and balance sheet.

Fit scores by strategy

CLS0wins

7winsFICO

Warren Buffett

52D

A85

Benjamin Graham

76B

A88

Philip Fisher

55D

A85

Peter Lynch

55D

B70

Joel Greenblatt

69C

A94

Charlie Munger

44F

A91

Terry Smith

38F

A95

Side-by-side metrics

Metric	CLS	FICO
Market cap	Winner: $39.84B	$28.53B
P/E (TTM)	43.6x	33.8x Winner
EV/EBIT	38.8x	30.9x Winner
ROIC (TTM)	29.23%	53.2% Winner
Gross margin	11.61%	84.16% Winner
Net margin	6.95%	33.67% Winner
Revenue CAGR 5y	Winner: 22.3%	10.89%
EPS CAGR 5y	Winner: 73.03%	18.48%
Debt / Equity	0.4x	- Winner
Dividend yield	0.0%	0.0%

Where each one wins

The metrics with the biggest gap between the two - sorted so the most decisive edges read first.

CLS leads on

EPS CAGR 5y73.03%vs 18.48%+75%
Revenue CAGR 5y22.3%vs 10.89%+51%
Market cap$39.84Bvs $28.53B+28%

FICO leads on

Debt / Equity-vs 0.4x+122%
Gross margin84.16%vs 11.61%+86%
Net margin33.67%vs 6.95%+79%
ROIC (TTM)53.2%vs 29.23%+45%

More like CLS

CLS vs FTNT CLS vs CAMS.BO CLS vs TNE.AX CLS vs 4071.T

More like FICO

FICO vs FTNT FICO vs CAMS.BO FICO vs TNE.AX FICO vs 4071.T

Read the full Buffett-Brain analysis for CLS Read the full Buffett-Brain analysis for FICO

Related on invest-like

Strongest Moat Highest ROIC Warren Buffett strategy Economic Moat

Key terms in this analysis

ROIC Free Cash Flow (FCF)Economic Moat P/E Ratio Margin of Safety Quality Score

Educational tool. Fit scores are deterministic projections from public financials onto each investor's published criteria - not personal recommendations or advice.