Cloud data analytics platform company Teradata (NYSE: TDC) has announced the availability of Teradata Vantage on Google Cloud Marketplace.

Teradata customers using Vantage on Google Cloud will have the ability to subscribe to Vantage on Google Cloud with a private, directly negotiated agreement via the Google Cloud Marketplace.

The company said that by subscribing to Vantage on Google through the Marketplace, its customers can retire their Google Cloud spend commitment and simplify their procurement and billing processes through a single channel.

Google Cloud Marketplace is an online store that enables customers to deploy functional software packages that run on Google Cloud.

“We believe in giving our customers the flexibility to subscribe to and deploy our world-class, enterprise-scale cloud data analytics platform in the environment of their choice,” said Brian Wood, Director and Cloud Advocate at Teradata.

“For businesses that prefer Google Cloud’s global infrastructure and its fast and reliable software-defined network, we are offering a simplified and streamlined procurement experience for Vantage via the Google Cloud Marketplace.

“Now our joint customers can experience the power of Vantage on Google Cloud – enabling the most complex data analytics at scale – with the simplicity and ease-of-use of Google Cloud Marketplace’s one-stop-shopping environment.”

Teradata Vantage is a hybrid multi-cloud data analytics software platform that enables ecosystem simplification by unifying analytics, data lakes and data warehouses.

Vantage on Google Cloud is delivered as-a-service and offers their joint customers enterprise security and audited compliance and encryption of data in motion and at rest.

The company also said it offers service availability for 99.9% uptime, system maintenance and patch management, and scaling of compute resources independent of storage.

Teradata Vantage on Google Cloud is available to their customers, served by Google Cloud data centres, in North America (USA and Canada), London, Frankfurt, and Sydney.

Alps Advisors Lifts ServiceNow Position by 13.9%

Alps Advisors Inc. increased its holdings in ServiceNow Inc (NYSE:NOW) by 13.9% during the second quarter of 2019, according to the firm’s most recent Form 13F filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Following the purchase of an additional 312 shares during the quarter, Alps Advisors held a total of 2,554 shares of the enterprise IT platform provider, valued at approximately $701,000 at the time of the filing.

Other Institutional Investors Also Expand Positions

Alps Advisors was not alone in growing its ServiceNow stake. Several other institutional investors made incremental additions to their NOW holdings across Q1 and Q2 2019:

• Cornerstone Advisors Inc. grew its holdings by 3.6% in Q2, adding 42 shares for a total of 1,212 shares valued at $333,000.
• Cigna Investments Inc. (New) increased its position by 2.0% in Q1, acquiring 53 additional shares for a total of 2,652 shares valued at $654,000.
• BBVA USA Bancshares Inc. raised its stake by 1.6% in Q2, adding 53 shares for a total of 3,286 shares valued at $902,000.
• Sandy Spring Bank nearly doubled its position with a 118.0% increase in Q1, buying 59 additional shares for a total of 109 shares valued at $27,000.
• Allred Capital Management LLC grew its holdings by 3.5% in Q2, adding 63 shares for a total of 1,888 shares valued at $543,000.

In aggregate, institutional investors held approximately 92.80% of ServiceNow’s outstanding shares as of the filing dates referenced above.

Insider Trading Activity

ServiceNow insiders also engaged in notable selling activity during this period:

• David Schneider (insider) sold 3,559 shares on August 28, 2019 at an average price of $261.77 per share, totaling $931,639.43. Following the sale, Schneider retained approximately 42,362 shares valued at roughly $11.09 million.
• Fay Sien Goon (insider) sold 408 shares on August 19, 2019 at an average price of $258.36 per share, totaling $105,410.88. Goon retained approximately 41,777 shares valued at roughly $10.79 million after the transaction.

In total, insiders sold 117,767 shares valued at approximately $32.08 million during the most recent quarter reported. Corporate insiders collectively owned around 1.00% of the company’s stock.

Analyst Ratings and Price Targets

Wall Street analysts remained broadly bullish on ServiceNow heading into the autumn of 2019. A wave of rating updates followed the company’s Q2 2019 earnings release on July 24, 2019:

• BTIG Research reiterated a “Buy” rating with a $320.00 price target (July 25, 2019).
• Jefferies Financial Group raised its target from $285.00 to $330.00, maintaining a “Buy” rating (July 25, 2019).
• Raymond James lifted its target from $340.00 to $342.00 with a “Strong Buy” rating (July 25, 2019).
• Credit Suisse Group raised its target from $280.00 to $300.00 with an “Outperform” rating (July 25, 2019).
• UBS Group set a new target of $332.00, reiterating a “Buy” rating (July 25, 2019).

Across all covering analysts at the time of publication, four had assigned a Hold rating, twenty-six a Buy, and two a Strong Buy, producing a consensus rating of “Buy” and an average price target of $292.34.

Stock Performance and Key Metrics

On the Friday prior to publication, NYSE:NOW closed at $263.50, down $6.12 for the session, on trading volume of approximately 1.29 million shares against a 30-day average volume of around 1.43 million shares. Selected financial metrics as of that date included:

• Market capitalization: approximately $50.55 billion
• P/E ratio: 1,317.50 (reflecting near-zero GAAP earnings)
• PEG ratio: 22.66
• Beta: 1.34
• Quick ratio / Current ratio: 1.10
• Debt-to-equity ratio: 0.54
• 50-day moving average: $269.27
• 200-day moving average: $262.62
• 52-week low / high: $147.63 / $303.17

Q2 2019 Earnings Summary

ServiceNow reported its Q2 2019 financial results on July 24, 2019. Highlights included:

• EPS: ($0.01) on a GAAP basis, beating the consensus estimate of ($0.03) by $0.02.
• Revenue: $833.90 million, slightly ahead of the consensus estimate of $831.50 million.
• Year-over-year revenue growth: 32.1%
• Return on equity: 4.29%
• Net margin: 0.09%

For context, ServiceNow reported $0.49 EPS in the same quarter of the prior year. Analysts projected the company would post approximately $0.43 EPS for the full fiscal year at the time of this writing.

About ServiceNow

ServiceNow, Inc. is an enterprise cloud computing company that provides a platform for digitizing and automating workflows across IT, customer service, human resources, security operations, and integrated risk management. Its flagship Now Platform enables organizations to define, structure, manage, and automate services at scale. ServiceNow is headquartered in Santa Clara, California, and trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol NOW.

This article is based on publicly available SEC filings and analyst reports as reported in September 2019. It is provided for historical and informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.

Tributary Capital Management Trims ServiceNow Position

Tributary Capital Management LLC reduced its stake in ServiceNow Inc (NYSE:NOW) by 10.0% during the second quarter of 2019, according to its most recent filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC). After selling 1,500 shares during the period, the institutional investor held 13,500 shares of the information technology services provider. At the time of the filing, Tributary Capital Management LLC’s ServiceNow holdings were valued at approximately $3,707,000.

Other Institutional Investors Adjust Their Positions

Tributary’s reduction contrasts with significant position increases made by several other large institutional investors:

• Norges Bank established a new position in ServiceNow during Q4, valued at approximately $297,403,000.
• GQG Partners LLC increased its position by 444.8% in Q1, acquiring an additional 804,514 shares. The firm now holds 985,385 shares valued at $242,370,000.
• Jennison Associates LLC raised its position by 26.2% in Q1, adding 630,491 shares to reach a total of 3,036,568 shares valued at $748,484,000.
• Carillon Tower Advisers Inc. grew its position by 60.2% in Q1, purchasing an additional 263,615 shares to bring its total to 701,244 shares valued at $172,849,000.
• American Century Companies Inc. increased its position by 14.6% in Q4, adding 226,028 shares for a total of 1,772,188 shares valued at $315,538,000.

Taken together, institutional investors owned approximately 93.66% of ServiceNow’s outstanding stock at the time of reporting.

Insider Transactions

Two notable insider sales were disclosed during this period:

• Chirantan Jitendra Desai (company insider) sold 1,563 shares on July 12th at an average price of $302.30, totaling $472,494.90. Following the transaction, Desai retained 32,824 shares valued at approximately $9,922,695.20.
• Michael Scarpelli (CFO) sold 31,183 shares on August 13th at an average price of $260.22, totaling $8,114,440.26. After the sale, Scarpelli directly owned 36,200 shares valued at approximately $9,419,964.

In total, insiders sold 117,359 shares valued at $32,001,932 over the preceding 90-day period. Company insiders owned approximately 1.00% of the total stock at the time of reporting.

Analyst Ratings and Price Targets

Multiple brokerages issued research coverage on ServiceNow around this period:

• BMO Capital Markets reaffirmed an “outperform” rating and raised its price target to $315.00 (up from $295.00) on July 25th.
• JMP Securities raised its price target to $325.00, issuing a “market outperform” rating on July 25th.
• ValuEngine downgraded ServiceNow from “strong-buy” to “buy” on June 3rd.
• Cleveland Research initiated coverage on June 17th with a “buy” rating.
• KeyCorp raised its price target from $270.00 to $320.00 and assigned an “overweight” rating on July 25th.

At the time of reporting, the analyst consensus breakdown was as follows: four analysts rated the stock a “hold,” twenty-six assigned a “buy” rating, and two assigned a “strong buy.” The average rating was “Buy” with a consensus price target of $287.86.

Key Financial Metrics (as of August 2019)

Shares of NOW opened at $256.91 on the Monday referenced in the report. Key financial metrics at the time included:

• Market Capitalization: $47.30 billion
• P/E Ratio: 1,284.55
• PEG Ratio: 21.00
• Beta: 1.30
• 50-Day Moving Average: $281.92
• 200-Day Moving Average: $259.51
• Debt-to-Equity Ratio: 0.54
• Current Ratio: 1.10
• Quick Ratio: 1.10
• 12-Month Low: $147.63
• 12-Month High: $303.17

Q2 2019 Earnings Summary

ServiceNow reported its Q2 2019 earnings on July 24th. Key highlights included:

• EPS: ($0.01), beating the Zacks consensus estimate of ($0.03) by $0.02.
• Revenue: $833.90 million, slightly above the consensus estimate of $831.50 million.
• Year-over-Year Revenue Growth: 32.1%
• Return on Equity: 4.29%
• Net Margin: 0.09%

For context, the company reported EPS of $0.49 in the same quarter of the prior year. Research analysts projected full-year EPS of $0.43 for the then-current fiscal year.

About ServiceNow

ServiceNow, Inc. provides enterprise cloud computing solutions that define, structure, manage, and automate services for large organizations worldwide. The company’s core offerings include IT service management (ITSM) applications as well as digital workflow products spanning customer service, human resources, security operations, integrated risk management, and other enterprise functions.

Note: All financial data in this article reflects publicly available information as reported in SEC filings and analyst research from mid-2019. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.

Overview

New Relic, Inc. (NYSE: NEWR) and UMeWorld Ltd. (OTCMKTS: UMEWF) are both classified as computer and technology companies, but they operate in very different market segments and at vastly different scales. New Relic is an established, publicly traded SaaS observability platform, while UMeWorld is a small-cap educational technology holding company. This comparison examines the two businesses across seven dimensions: institutional ownership, insider ownership, risk and volatility, analyst recommendations, profitability, valuation, and earnings.

Insider and Institutional Ownership

Institutional ownership is a widely watched signal of long-term confidence from large money managers, hedge funds, and endowments. At the time of this comparison:

• New Relic: 79.3% of shares held by institutional investors; 17.4% held by insiders.
• UMeWorld: Institutional ownership data was not reported; 6.0% of shares held by insiders.

New Relic’s high institutional ownership suggests broad confidence from professional investors. UMeWorld’s comparatively low insider ownership and lack of reported institutional interest reflect its status as a micro-cap OTC-traded company.

Risk and Volatility

Beta measures a stock’s price sensitivity relative to the broader market (S&P 500). A beta of 1.0 means the stock moves in line with the index; values below 1.0 indicate lower volatility, while negative values suggest inverse correlation.

• New Relic: Beta of 0.83 — approximately 17% less volatile than the S&P 500.
• UMeWorld: Beta of -1.21 — indicating an inverse and amplified relationship with the broader market, which is common in very thinly traded OTC stocks.

A negative beta for UMeWorld should be interpreted with caution. For micro-cap OTC stocks with low trading volume, beta calculations can be statistically unreliable due to sparse price data.

Analyst Recommendations

The following ratings summary was reported by MarketBeat.com at the time of the original article’s publication:

New Relic carried a consensus analyst price target of $99.08 at the time, representing a potential upside of approximately 72.3% from its then-current trading price. UMeWorld had no analyst coverage, which is typical for OTC micro-cap stocks and limits the available information for retail investors.

Profitability

Key profitability metrics for both companies at the time of comparison:

New Relic was operating at a net loss at the time, a common characteristic for high-growth SaaS companies that prioritize revenue expansion and customer acquisition over near-term profitability. UMeWorld’s profitability metrics were unavailable, likely due to the company’s minimal reported revenue.

Valuation and Earnings

The revenue gap between these two companies is stark. New Relic reported over $479 million in gross revenue, while UMeWorld reported just $10,000 — a difference of more than 47,000x. Both companies reported net losses. UMeWorld’s extremely high Price/Sales ratio of 731.64 reflects its near-zero revenue base rather than any meaningful market premium.

Summary Scorecard

Across the 11 financial and qualitative factors examined in this comparison, New Relic scored more favorably than UMeWorld on 6 of those factors, primarily driven by its scale, institutional coverage, analyst following, and revenue base.

Company Profiles

New Relic, Inc.

New Relic, Inc. is a software-as-a-service (SaaS) observability company headquartered in San Francisco, California, and founded in 2007. Its cloud-based platform enables organizations to collect, store, and analyze telemetry data across their entire software stack. Key product areas at the time of this article included:

• Application Performance Management (APM): Visibility into server-side application performance, including response times, error rates, and transaction throughput.
• New Relic Mobile: Code-level performance monitoring for iOS and Android applications.
• New Relic Browser: Real-user monitoring for desktop and mobile browser-based applications.
• New Relic Synthetics: Simulated usage testing across the software development lifecycle.
• New Relic Infrastructure: Host-level health and configuration monitoring across cloud, on-premises, and hybrid environments.
• New Relic Insights: Real-time analytics for both technical and business users.
• New Relic Applied Intelligence: AIOps capabilities for alert correlation and incident detection.

New Relic distributes its products through direct sales, online channels, and partner integrations.

UMeWorld Ltd.

UMeWorld Ltd. is a holding company incorporated in Hong Kong, operating as an educational technology business in the digital media and digital education segments. Its product portfolio at the time included UMFun, UMTang, UEXiao, and 17Speech. The company was founded by Michael M. Lee on August 8, 1997.

Editorial Note

This article reflects publicly available financial data from August 2019 and is preserved here for historical reference. Both companies’ financial positions, analyst ratings, and market conditions have changed significantly since this comparison was written. This article does not constitute investment advice.

Overview

Carbon Black (NASDAQ: CBLK) and New Relic (NYSE: NEWR) were both publicly traded technology companies operating in overlapping areas of enterprise software — security and observability, respectively. This comparison examines how they stacked up in mid-2019 across revenue, profitability, analyst sentiment, institutional ownership, and market volatility.

Revenue and Valuation

The table below compares gross revenue, net income, earnings per share, and key valuation ratios for both companies.

New Relic generated significantly higher revenue than Carbon Black — more than double — while posting a smaller net loss in absolute terms. Both companies carried similar price-to-sales ratios (approximately 7.7x), reflecting comparable market premium expectations for growth-stage software businesses. Neither company was profitable at the time of this comparison.

The widely divergent price-to-earnings ratios are a consequence of both companies operating at a loss; the P/E figures are negative and not directly comparable in the traditional sense. Investors in this segment typically focus on price-to-sales or price-to-gross-profit multiples rather than P/E when evaluating unprofitable SaaS and security companies.

Analyst Recommendations

The following breakdown reflects analyst ratings and consensus price targets as reported by MarketBeat at the time of publication.

Carbon Black carried a consensus price target of $18.30 at the time, implying a potential downside of approximately 16.54% from its then-current price. New Relic, by contrast, had a consensus price target of $99.08, representing a potential upside of approximately 57.29%. The broader analyst community leaned more bullish on New Relic, driven largely by a higher number of outright buy ratings (10 vs. 2 for Carbon Black).

Insider and Institutional Ownership

Institutional ownership can serve as a proxy for large-fund confidence in a company’s long-term growth prospects.

• Carbon Black: 64.5% of shares held by institutional investors; 21.6% held by insiders.
• New Relic: 78.3% of shares held by institutional investors; 17.4% held by insiders.

New Relic had meaningfully higher institutional ownership, suggesting greater interest from hedge funds, endowments, and large asset managers. Carbon Black had a higher insider ownership percentage, which can indicate management confidence — but also a less liquid float. Neither metric alone is a definitive signal; they are most useful when considered alongside the other factors in this comparison.

Volatility and Risk (Beta)

Beta measures a stock’s price sensitivity relative to the broader market (S&P 500), where a beta of 1.0 means the stock moves in line with the index.

• Carbon Black: Beta of 1.28 — approximately 28% more volatile than the S&P 500.
• New Relic: Beta of 0.83 — approximately 17% less volatile than the S&P 500.

New Relic offered a comparatively smoother ride for investors concerned about short-term price swings. Carbon Black’s higher beta reflected its smaller size, more concentrated product portfolio, and the inherent uncertainty of the cybersecurity growth market at the time.

Profitability Metrics

The table below compares net margins, return on equity (ROE), and return on assets (ROA) — three standard measures of how efficiently a company converts revenue and assets into profit.

Both companies were operating at a loss, but New Relic’s losses were significantly smaller as a percentage of revenue and assets. Carbon Black’s deeply negative margins reflected heavy investment in sales, marketing, and R&D relative to its revenue base — a common pattern for early-stage security vendors scaling aggressively. New Relic’s comparatively tighter losses suggested a more mature cost structure.

Summary

Across the 15 factors examined in the original comparison, New Relic outperformed Carbon Black on 9 of them. New Relic held advantages in revenue scale, profitability metrics, institutional ownership, analyst upside targets, and lower market volatility. Carbon Black was favoured in neither category decisively, though its insider ownership and niche focus in endpoint security were notable differentiators.

It is worth noting that both companies were loss-making growth businesses at the time, and direct stock comparisons in this context carry significant uncertainty. Shortly after this analysis, Carbon Black was acquired by VMware for approximately $2.1 billion in October 2019, rendering the public equity comparison moot.

About Carbon Black

Carbon Black, Inc. (formerly Bit9, Inc., renamed in January 2016) was a cybersecurity company founded in 2002 and headquartered in Waltham, Massachusetts. It developed the CB Predictive Security Cloud, a big-data analytics platform for endpoint security. Key products included CB Defense (next-generation antivirus and EDR), CB ThreatHunter (threat hunting and incident response), CB LiveOps (real-time endpoint querying and remediation), and CB Protection (application control for critical infrastructure). The company served enterprises, government agencies, and mid-market organizations globally. Carbon Black was acquired by VMware in 2019 and subsequently rebranded as VMware Carbon Black.

About New Relic

New Relic, Inc. is a software-as-a-service observability company founded in 2007 and headquartered in San Francisco, California. Its cloud-based platform provides application performance monitoring (APM), infrastructure monitoring, browser performance tracking, mobile monitoring, and synthetic testing. New Relic’s tools are used by engineering and operations teams to collect, store, and analyze telemetry data — including metrics, events, logs, and traces — across distributed software environments. The company sells primarily through a direct sales model supplemented by online and self-serve channels. New Relic subsequently transitioned to a consumption-based pricing model and made significant portions of its platform available under a free tier, representing a major strategic shift from its subscription model of the 2019 era.