logo
Better Cloud Stock: Docusign vs. Confluent

Better Cloud Stock: Docusign vs. Confluent

Yahoo24-06-2025
Docusign's business is maturing, but its profits are rising.
Confluent is growing at a faster rate, but it isn't profitable yet.
Insiders are fleeing one stock a lot faster than the other.
10 stocks we like better than Docusign ›
Docusign (NASDAQ: DOCU) and Confluent (NASDAQ: CFLT) both help companies streamline their businesses with their cloud-based services. Docusign is the world's largest provider of e-signature services, while Confluent's platform processes real-time data as it flows between different applications across an organization.
But over the past 12 months, Docusign's stock price rose 44% as Confluent's stock slumped 13%. Let's see why the e-signature services leader outperformed the "data in motion" company by such a wide margin -- and if it will remain the better investment over the next few years.
Docusign serves over 1.4 million customers in 180 countries, and it's been used in more than a billion transactions. It generates most of its revenue from subscriptions to its e-signature platform, its contract lifecycle management (CLM) tools, and other cloud-based services.
Confluent served 6,140 customers in its latest quarter. Its namesake platform runs on Apache Kafka, an open-source platform for streaming data, but it adds additional analytics tools to differentiate itself from other "Kafka-as-a-service" providers. It generates its revenue from a mix of subscriptions and more flexible consumption-based fees.
Docusign's growth is driven by the growing usage of digital documents and e-signatures as they replace their pen-and-paper counterparts. Confluent's growth is fueled by a need to evaluate data as it streams across the silos of a large organization. That real-time analysis gets everyone on the same page to make faster decisions.
From fiscal 2021 to fiscal 2025 (which ended this January), Docusign's revenue grew at a CAGR of 20% as its adjusted gross margin rose from 79% to 82%. It also turned profitable on a generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) basis over the past two fiscal years as it downsized its workforce and streamlined its spending.
But from fiscal 2025 to fiscal 2028, analysts expect Docusign's revenue to grow at a slower CAGR of 8% as its core market matures, it laps some earlier-than-expected contract renewals from fiscal 2024, cautiously expands its new AI-driven Intelligent Agreement Management (IAM) platform, and deals with tougher competitive and macro headwinds.
Analysts expect its GAAP EPS to decline in fiscal 2026 as it expands its lower-margin IAM platform while lapping some big buybacks and one-time tax benefits. But over the following two years, they expect its EPS to grow at a CAGR of 41% as it scales up its IAM platform and streamlines its spending.
From 2020 to 2024, Confluent's revenue rose at a CAGR of 42% as its adjusted gross margin expanded from 70% to 79%. That growth was driven by the accelerating adoption of real-time data streaming services (especially among larger enterprise customers), the expansion of its higher-margin cloud-based ecosystem with more analytics tools, and its new overseas customers. But it's still never been profitable on a GAAP basis.
From 2024 to 2027, analysts expect its revenue to grow at a CAGR of 19% as it gradually narrows its net losses. Its biggest potential catalysts include the growth of its cloud platform, fresh tailwinds from the booming AI market, and the expansion of its enterprise and overseas businesses.
Docusign's stock trades at 61 times forward earnings and 5 times this year's sales. Confluent can't be valued by its profits, but it trades at 7 times this year's sales.
However, Docusign's insiders sold nearly 2.1 million shares over the past 12 months while only buying around 1,300 shares. Confluent's insiders bought 17.2 million shares and sold 17.6 million shares during the same period. That warmer insider sentiment suggests that Confluent might have a bit more upside potential than Docusign.
Docusign's stock rose over the past year as the bulls cheered the growth potential of its IAM platform in the AI market, but it's still being valued as a growth stock as its core business matures. Confluent should continue growing at a faster rate as its cloud platform expands, and its stock seems more reasonably valued relative to its growth potential.
I wouldn't rush to buy either of these cloud-oriented stocks right now. But if I had to choose one over the other, I'd probably avoid Docusign and bet on a stronger recovery for Confluent -- which stands to process a lot more streaming data as the cloud and AI markets expand.
Before you buy stock in Docusign, consider this:
The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Docusign wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.
Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $664,089!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $881,731!*
Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 994% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 172% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join .
See the 10 stocks »
*Stock Advisor returns as of June 23, 2025
Leo Sun has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Docusign. The Motley Fool recommends Confluent. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
Better Cloud Stock: Docusign vs. Confluent was originally published by The Motley Fool
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

The big difference between bitcoin and crypto treasury companies
The big difference between bitcoin and crypto treasury companies

Yahoo

time20 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

The big difference between bitcoin and crypto treasury companies

The future is on off-chain. That's right, we spent the past 15 years telling you to get your money onto 'the blockchain' and now we're telling you to pull it out and put it into Charles Schwab so that someone else can buy those scarce digital assets for you. Of course, I'm talking about this cycle's leverage of choice: digital asset treasury (DAT) companies. Gradually, then suddenly, public markets created a new species of crypto company, DATs. Unlike Tesla or Coinbase who hold bitcoin as part of their operating businesses, DATs exist solely to hold coins on their balance sheet, giving shareholders high-beta exposure to these treasuries. The thesis can be quite compelling: these companies could offer a more capital efficient way for investors to gain exposure to the underlying digital assets. They accomplish this by leveraging capital markets (e.g., issuing shares, issuing convertible notes) to generate revenue to acquire bitcoin, ethereum, solana, etc. But just like not all blockchains are created equal, neither are DATs. With the limited data available so far, it appears that bitcoin DATs are comparatively stable to their volatile crypto counterparts. The mNAV metric is conventionally the most common way to measure a DAT's performance – that is, the company's enterprise value (or sometimes market capitalization) divided by the mark-to-market value of the coins it holds. A 1.0x mNAV means the company trades right at its treasury value; higher than that is a premium – lower, a discount. The data on DATs: bitcoin To compare relative volatility and performance of these DATs, let's take a look at mNAVs for some Bitcoin treasury companies first: [Micro]Strategy (NASDAQ: MSTR): 1.58x Semler Scientific (NASDAQ: SMLR): 1.04x Metaplanet (OTCMKTS: MTPLF): 1.14x Nakamoto Holdings (NASDAQ: NAKA) is currently trading at about ~1.0x of their current disclosed holdings of 21 BTC ( this is before their anticipated ~$726m smash buy purchase) Data from Blockworks Treasury Dashboard Pulling data from we see that Bitcoin treasury companies range between 0.9x – 1.6x mNAV. Overall Bitcoin treasuries have an average ~1.3x mNAV with tight variance. Bitcoin treasury mNAVs have shrunk since U.S. spot bitcoin ETFs have eaten into these stocks' premiums, but the premiums are still there for many bitcoin DATs. The data on DATs: crypto Now, let's look at the ETH, SOL, and SUI treasury companies (using a dataset and PIPE structure breakdown from BitMEX Research): ETH DATs: BitMine Immersion Technologies (NASDAQ: BMNR):1.9x Dynamix Corporation (NASDAQ: DYNX): 0.16x (a massive discount, however this is a pending merger) SOL DATs: Upexi, Inc (NASDAQ: UPEXI): 1.2x DeFi Development Corp (NASDAQ: DFDV): 1.8x. SUI DATs: Mill City Ventures III (NASDAQ: MCVT) 1.8x (with advisor warrants that arguably 'encourage volatility,' per Bitmex) We see a much wider range of mNAV for non-BTC DATs, from 0.16x to 1.94x and an interquartile range of 0.98x – 1.69x. BitMEX research explains that management teams of crypto DATs are incentivized to increase assets under management as their compensation is usually a function of a percentage of the treasury. Less liquid cryptoassets tend to be more price reflexive when a DAT comes along and smashes buy, and stocks themselves can be highly volatile, even by bitcoin treasury company standards. Even with 2025's limited data on DATs, we see that non-BTC treasury companies are less tightly clustered and have wider ranging mNAVs compared to their BTC counterparts. Do bitcoin treasury and crypto treasury investors want the same thing? The comparison suggests we're seeing two very different market structures emerge under the DAT umbrella. My interpretation is that Bitcoin DAT valuations cluster tightly because they are larger, more liquid, and increasingly plugged into institutional flows. Just like Bitcoin, they've matured into more predictable vehicles for investors seeking exposure to Bitcoin through equity markets. Non-Bitcoin DATs are less liquid, contain assets that are themselves more volatile than BTC, and investors have lower long term confidence in the underlying assets. I mean… does anyone actually want to own SOL in 10 years? If not, then why are some of these management comps extended for 3 decades? Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Evercore adds Affirm to its Tactical Underperform list
Evercore adds Affirm to its Tactical Underperform list

Yahoo

time20 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Evercore adds Affirm to its Tactical Underperform list

-- Evercore ISI added Affirm Holdings (NASDAQ:AFRM) to its Tactical Underperform (TAP) list, citing stretched valuations and the stock's sharp rally heading into next week's earnings. Affirm shares have surged 115% since April and 18% since the start of August, making it the best performer year-to-date under Evercore's coverage. Analysts said the run-up leaves 'the risk/reward less favorable heading into next week's print than it was a few weeks ago.' The broker highlighted that Affirm is trading near its recent peak valuation of high-20s next twelve months (NTM) EV/EBITDA, while management's traditionally cautious stance limits the likelihood of guidance exceeding consensus estimates. Still, Evercore maintained its Outperform rating on the stock, describing the TAP call as tactical rather than a change in its longer-term view. 'We still believe AFRM has the best risk platform in the space and will benefit over the longer-term from penetration in new verticals and geographies as well as product expansion,' the analysts led by Adam Frisch wrote. Investors are awaiting Affirm's fiscal fourth-quarter earnings on Aug. 28, when management will outline fiscal 2026 guidance. Evercore expects guidance to be broadly in line with consensus, with gross merchandise volume (GMV) seen growing 27% ex-Walmart and revenue less transaction costs (RLTC) margin at 3.9%. The firm noted risks tied to potential GMV declines at Walmart (NYSE:WMT), which accounts for about 5% of Affirm's volume, after competitor Klarna expanded its OnePay offering. Analysts also pointed to a margin dynamic. Notably, lower Walmart volumes could prove accretive given the partnership's lower economics, though this might be offset by the continued growth in 0% annual percentage rate (APR) loans. Over the past four quarters, Affirm has averaged a Revenue Less Transaction (JO:NTUJ) Costs (RLTC) margin of 4.1%, above management's 3-4% target. 'We expect a 3.9% RLTC margin for FY26 (down 14bps YoY and in line with consensus) but note that could prove a little conservative with continued execution,' analysts said. Related articles Evercore adds Affirm to its Tactical Underperform list After soaring 149%, this stock is back in our AI's favor - & already +25% in July 7 Undervalued Stocks on the Rise With 50%+ Upside Potential Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store