# RBRK — Rubrik, Inc.

## Company & Research Metadata

- **Company:** Rubrik, Inc.
- **Ticker:** RBRK
- **Exchange:** NYSE
- **Sector / Industry:** Technology / cyber resilience and data security
- **Template version:** 2.7
- **Research date:** 2026-10-21
- **Valuation / score price snapshot:** $116.51 — 2026-11-03 regular-session close, America/New_York
- **Tracking tier:** Primary Watchlist
- **Owned:** No
- **Primary operating period reviewed:** Q2 FY2027
- **Historical period reviewed:** TTM, FY 2026, FY 2025; latest balance-sheet date shown below
- **Latest investor presentation reviewed:** Results release and associated financial tables; no separate slide deck materially used
- **Latest earnings call reviewed:** Q2 FY2027, complete material Q&A
- **Latest post-earnings management commentary reviewed:** No separate later management presentation incorporated

- **Price snapshot date:** 2026-11-03

- **Price snapshot time / timezone:** Regular-session close, America/New_York (including exchange half-days)
- **Competitor / analyst-Q&A audit:** 2026-10-28; original operating, price and valuation snapshots retained.

## What's Changed Since Previous Review

**Current Review:** 2026-10-28

**Previous Review:** 2026-10-21

**Update Trigger:** Competitor relevance and analyst-Q&A correction

| Area | Previous View | Current View | Investment Impact |
|---|---|---|---|
| Competition | Preceding operating and comparable-company classifications | Product/customer/geographic boundaries corrected; direct rivals separated from substitutes, partners and valuation anchors | Corrects the competitive comparison; does not by itself re-underwrite the valuation |
| Analyst questions | Prior source-linked Q&A summaries | Complete questions and sentence-form management answers; all 11 existing rows retained | Improves readability while preserving the recorded exchange meaning |
| Valuation and scores | Approved operating/price snapshots, scenarios, scores and decisions | Preserved | No price refresh, rerank or change to valuation assumptions in this correction pass |

**Thesis:** No new fundamental thesis determination is made in this correction pass. The prior investment decision is preserved; the corrected competitive scope should govern the next substantive review.

## Investment Snapshot

| Metric | Current View |
|---|---|
| Price Snapshot | $116.51 — 2026-11-03 regular-session close, America/New_York |
| Rating / Zone Status | Avoid |
| Bear / Base / Bull Fair Value | $16.33 / $54.00 / $121.49 |
| Scenario Probabilities | 25% / 50% / 25% |
| Probability-Weighted Fair Value | $61.46 |
| Probability-Weighted Expected Return | -47.2% |
| Bear-Case Return | -86.0% |
| Strong Buy Zone | ≤ $17.96 |
| Buy Zone | >$17.96–$49.17 |
| Avoid Chasing Above | > $68.29 |
| Quality Score / Tier | 80.0 / Tier A |
| Opportunity Score / Rank | 32.1 / #62 of 76 |
| Risk Level | Medium-High |
| Tracking / Ownership | Primary Watchlist / Not Owned |

**Decision rationale:** RBRK is **Avoid** at $114.59, with -46.4% probability-weighted upside and -85.7% bear-case return. Ransomware resilience and data recovery are durable enterprise needs, and the platform can expand across customer workloads. Confidence is 54/100 because the earnings conversion, competitive and capital assumptions below remain conditional.

## Investment Thesis

Ransomware resilience and data recovery are durable enterprise needs, and the platform can expand across customer workloads. Q2 FY27 subscription ARR grew 33% to $1.66 billion and revenue 38% to $427 million. The key question is whether growth produces sustainable owner earnings after compensation and customer-acquisition spending. A high recurring-growth profile does not justify every revenue multiple.

### What the Market May Be Mispricing

| Debate | Research judgment |
|---|---|
| Subscription ARR quality and customer expansion | Ransomware resilience and data recovery are durable enterprise needs, and the platform can expand across customer workloads. |
| Recovery differentiation and competitive wins | Subscription retention, expansion ARR, large-customer growth, recovery use cases and acquisition payback drive economics. |
| SBC-adjusted profitability and dilution | Q2 FCF margin was about 15%, but TTM SBC of $342 million exceeded FCF of $304 million. |

## Business Overview

Rubrik sells subscription software for data protection, recovery and cyber resilience across enterprise, cloud and SaaS environments. It increasingly positions the platform around security and AI-related data operations. Recurring subscriptions and customer expansion drive ARR, while infrastructure compatibility and recovery reliability are central to adoption. Private Veeam and Cohesity remain direct competitors even though their public-market valuation multiples are unavailable.

### Business Takeaway

Rubrik sells subscription software for data protection, recovery and cyber resilience across enterprise, cloud and SaaS environments. Subscription retention, expansion ARR, large-customer growth, recovery use cases and acquisition payback drive economics.

## Industry, TAM & Market Share

Cyber resilience spending benefits from growing data and attack exposure, but backup, security and cloud-platform categories overlap. Broad cyber TAM estimates should be reduced for direct competition and existing customer budgets. Recovery outcomes and operational reliability are more important than category labels.

### Market-Share Analysis

Comparable same-definition share data for the subject and its principal rivals were not established. TAM estimates and company-specific volume measures are not treated as directly comparable market shares. The positioning analysis below is more reliable than a table of unmatched percentages.

#### Competitive Scale / Position

| Company / Platform | Primary Position | Relative Scale | Growth Direction | Investment Relevance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Veeam (private) | Direct: enterprise backup, recovery and data resilience | Product scope; no matched operating-scale series | Competes for data-protection budgets | Customer choice in the stated segment only |
| Cohesity (private) | Direct: enterprise data protection and recovery | Product scope; no matched operating-scale series | Competes for resilience platform consolidation | Customer choice in the stated segment only |
| Commvault (CVLT) | Direct: enterprise/cloud backup and cyber recovery | Product scope; no matched operating-scale series | Competes for backup and recovery contracts | Customer choice in the stated segment only |
| Dell; IBM | Direct segments: data protection and recovery products | Product scope; no matched operating-scale series | Product-specific overlap | Customer choice in the stated segment only |

### Industry Takeaway

Recovery outcomes and operational reliability are more important than category labels. The base case requires evidence of profitable adoption within that market.

## Customer Economics

Subscription retention, expansion ARR, large-customer growth, recovery use cases and acquisition payback drive economics. Material-rights revenue affects reported comparisons and should be normalized consistently. More protected data creates value only when pricing and service costs support attractive incremental gross profit.

### Customer-Economics Takeaway

The economic test is SBC-adjusted profitability and dilution. More protected data creates value only when pricing and service costs support attractive incremental gross profit.

## Competitive Landscape & Moat

### Competitive Landscape

The shared function is protecting and recovering enterprise data. SentinelOne and CrowdStrike primarily prevent/detect threats and are complementary security categories, not clean backup operating comparables.

| Competitor | Market Share | Positioning | Advantages vs. Company | Disadvantages vs. Company | Current Direction |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Veeam (private) | No consistent comparable series | Direct: enterprise backup, recovery and data resilience | Broad backup installed base and integrations | Different security architecture and deployment mix | Competes for data-protection budgets |
| Cohesity (private) | No consistent comparable series | Direct: enterprise data protection and recovery | Enterprise backup/data-management portfolio | Different installed base and platform architecture | Competes for resilience platform consolidation |
| Commvault (CVLT) | No consistent comparable series | Direct: enterprise/cloud backup and cyber recovery | Established enterprise protection workflows | Different transition, deployment and margin mix | Competes for backup and recovery contracts |
| Dell; IBM | No consistent comparable series | Direct segments: data protection and recovery products | Enterprise infrastructure distribution | Parent hardware/services earnings are not backup-only economics | Product-specific overlap |

### Moat Assessment

Integrated recovery workflows, customer trust and data-policy switching costs create meaningful barriers. Veeam, Cohesity and cloud providers have substantial capabilities. The moat strengthens when Rubrik becomes an operational standard across more of a customer's estate.

**Moat direction:** Strengthening — an analytical judgment about product and distribution economics, not a measured market-share claim.

### Competitive Takeaway

Integrated recovery workflows, customer trust and data-policy switching costs create meaningful barriers. The direct rivals determine commercial pressure; diversified or sector anchors provide valuation context and are not substitutes for direct competition.

## Financial Profile

### Historical Financials

Financial reporting periods follow the issuer's fiscal year: completed FY rows plus standalone current-year quarters and cumulative H1/9M for FY2027. Revenue, FCF and SBC are flows; cash is a period-end balance. FCF = operating cash flow minus property/equipment capex from SEC company facts; quarterly FCF after Q1 and any quarterly SBC derived from YTD are visibly marked. Missing values are N/D, not zero. Unit: USD millions. Data extracted from SEC-tagged filings as of 2026-11-07. Company-specific FCF definitions and acquisition effects may require further reconciliation.

| Period | Revenue | Growth | Gross Margin | Operating Margin | FCF | FCF Margin | SBC | Diluted Shares | Cash | Debt |
|---|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|
| FY2025 | 886.54 | 41.19% | 70.02% | -127.92% | 31.34 | 3.54% | 913.91 | 154 | 705.14 | 350.81 |
| FY2026 | 1,316 | 48.46% | 80.10% | -26.24% | 253.28 | 19.24% | 329.37 | 196 | 1,676 | 1,168 |
| Q1 FY2027 | $387.068 | N/D | 80.5% | -13.6% | $77.412 (derived: CFO - capex) | 20.0% | $73.368 | 203.668 | $429.397 | N/D |
| Q2 FY2027 | $427.26 | N/D | 78.4% | -16.8% | $71.247 (derived: current YTD - prior YTD) | 16.7% | $101.018 (derived: current YTD - prior YTD) | 206.097 | $416.166 | N/D |
| H1 FY2027 | $814.328 | N/D | 79.4% | -15.3% | $148.659 (derived: CFO - capex) | 18.3% | $174.386 | 204.903 | $416.166 | N/D |

### Financial Takeaways

Q2 FCF margin was about 15%, but TTM SBC of $342 million exceeded FCF of $304 million. GAAP operating losses and dilution remain material. The model uses economic EPS after compensation and financing rather than treating ARR or adjusted FCF as distributable earnings.

**Financial direction:** Improving — assess the reported trend alongside dilution and the balance sheet.

## Management & Capital Allocation

Management has executed strongly on recurring growth and improved cash conversion. Capital discipline and sales productivity must now convert that scale into per-share profit. Monitor revenue normalization, compensation intensity and the economics of new product expansion.

### Management Takeaway

Monitor revenue normalization, compensation intensity and the economics of new product expansion.

## Valuation

### Current Valuation

| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Price Snapshot | $116.51 — 2026-11-03 regular-session close, America/New_York |
| Market Capitalization | $23.76B |
| Enterprise Value | $23.16B |
| Trailing P/E | n/a |
| Provider forward P/E | 236.66 |
| EV / Sales | 15.02 |

### Comparable Company Analysis

| Company | Relevance | Public / Private | Forward P/E | EV / Sales | Growth / Margin / Risk Context |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RBRK — Rubrik, Inc. | Subject company | Public | 236.66 | 15.02 | cyber resilience and data security; 3Y revenue-growth estimate 23.54%; operating margin -18.31% |
| Veeam; Cohesity | Direct operating competitor / substitute | Private | N/A | N/A | direct backup, recovery and data-resilience platforms; no compatible standalone public multiple used |
| Commvault (CVLT) | Direct: enterprise/cloud backup and cyber recovery | Public | N/D — no matched snapshot collected | N/D — no matched snapshot collected | Competes for backup and recovery contracts |
| Dell; IBM | Direct segments: data protection and recovery products | Public | N/D — no matched snapshot collected | N/D — no matched snapshot collected | Product-specific overlap |

**Comparable takeaway:** The shared function is protecting and recovering enterprise data. SentinelOne and CrowdStrike primarily prevent/detect threats and are complementary security categories, not clean backup operating comparables. Quoted multiples retain their original dated snapshot; missing matched multiples are not estimated. Consolidated parent multiples do not isolate the competing product. No mechanical peer average is used.

The base terminal P/E is 32×, versus the provider's current forward P/E of 236.66×. Holding that quoted multiple constant on this model's 2029 EPS gives an illustrative present value of **$399.35**, versus the central base FV of **$54.00**. Earnings definitions differ, so this is a sensitivity check; it makes the dependence on a rerating or derating explicit.

### Valuation Scenarios

| Scenario | Key Assumptions | Fair Value | Probability | Probability Rationale | Return From Price Snapshot |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bear | 3Y revenue CAGR 17%; sustainable 2029 EPS $1.10 after compensation; 22× P/E; 14% discount rate; Growth moderates before margins mature; 2029 economic EPS is $1.10. | $16.33 | 25% | Execution, financing or competitive setbacks remain credible | -86.0% |
| Base | 3Y revenue CAGR 28%; sustainable 2029 EPS $2.50 after compensation; 32× P/E; 14% discount rate; Platform expansion and operating leverage produce $2.50 of 2029 economic EPS. | $54.00 | 50% | Most likely operating trajectory, requiring measurable progress | -53.7% |
| Bull | 3Y revenue CAGR 39%; sustainable 2029 EPS $4.50 after compensation; 40× P/E; 14% discount rate; Strong cyber-resilience adoption produces $4.50 of 2029 economic EPS. | $121.49 | 25% | Successful product conversion and operating leverage; not assured | +4.3% |
| **Probability-Weighted** | Sum of each scenario value × its probability | $61.46 | **100%** | Judgmental scenario probabilities | -47.2% |

### Valuation Takeaway

- **Primary valuation method:** Present value of sustainable 2029 equity earnings × scenario P/E, plus assumed interim dividends. The three-year discount horizon approximates late-2029 earning power.
- **Cross-check methods:** Direct competition, quoted peer multiples, current cash conversion, and the separate revenue/share/net-margin bridge in [the valuation workpaper](../valuation/watchlist_models_2026-10-21.md).
- **Key valuation dependencies:** Subscription ARR quality and customer expansion; Recovery differentiation and competitive wins; SBC-adjusted profitability and dilution. All forward figures are independent research assumptions, not company guidance or consensus.
- **Valuation confidence / Risk Level:** 54/100 / Medium-High. Scenario values are sensitive to sustainable earnings and terminal multiples.
- **Margin-of-safety conclusion:** Avoid at $114.59. New-file boundaries use Strong Buy = min(P/W FV ÷ 1.5, 1.1 × bear FV), Buy upper = P/W FV ÷ 1.25, Avoid above = P/W FV ÷ 0.90. Returns are to present fair value, not annualized returns or price targets for a particular date.

## Analyst Questions

The table consolidates related questions and follow-ups from each material participant in the complete call.

| Analyst / Firm | Core Question | Management Response | Research Read-Through |
|---|---|---|---|
| Saket Kalia / Barclays | Does reported or guided ARR include the Strata acquisition? | Management said Strata ARR is excluded from both results and guidance. | Judge allocation on per-share returns after financing and dilution. |
| Fatima Boolani / Citi | Why were net-new ARR and growth expectations increased? | Management said strong execution supported higher growth assumptions. | Treat the stated timetable as conditional on demonstrated execution. |
| John DiFucci / Guggenheim | How does the AI security architecture differ from point products? | Management said its platform approach extends beyond individual point products. | Confirm that this opportunity converts into profitable recurring demand. |
| Gregg Moskowitz / Mizuho | How much cloud-migration accounting impact remains? | Management said most of the migration impact is complete. | Confirm that this opportunity converts into profitable recurring demand. |
| Eric Heath / KeyBanc | How does resilience address AI-related threats? | Management said resilience complements prevention and detection. | Confirm that this opportunity converts into profitable recurring demand. |
| Keith Bachman / BMO | How should investors assess expectations for the agent cloud? | Management emphasized long-term platform development. | Confirm that this opportunity converts into profitable recurring demand. |
| Junaid Siddiqui / Truist | How exposed is Rubrik to hardware-cost inflation? | Management said the subscription model limits direct exposure. | Require durable cash conversion after compensation and ongoing investment. |
| Param Singh / Oppenheimer | How does identity adoption expand the offering? | Management said recovery capabilities are extending into prevention. | Check repeat usage and cohort economics rather than initial sales alone. |
| Gray Powell / BTIG | How do cloud and self-hosted offerings compare economically? | Management said both are growing and self-hosted offerings have a margin advantage. | Confirm that this opportunity converts into profitable recurring demand. |
| Rudy Kessinger / D.A. Davidson | Do hardware lead times materially affect subscriptions? | Management said there is no material subscription impact. | Confirm that this opportunity converts into profitable recurring demand. |
| Joe Vandrick / Scotiabank | What supports demand for identity resilience? | Management said identity compromise reinforces the need for resilience. | Confirm that this opportunity converts into profitable recurring demand. |

### Analyst-Q&A Takeaway

Underlying ARR growth is less dependent on migration and excludes the acquisition contribution cited in questions. Identity and agent security broaden demand, but sustainable margins must absorb continuing compensation.

## Thesis Monitoring

| Driver | Current State | Positive Trigger / Catalyst | Negative Trigger / Falsifier | What It Changes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Subscription ARR quality and customer expansion | Ransomware resilience and data recovery are durable enterprise needs, and the platform can expand across customer workloads. | Revenue trajectory sustains approximately 28% annual growth on a comparable basis | Growth remains below the 17% bear assumption over a full operating cycle | Revenue outlook and scenario probabilities |
| Recovery differentiation and competitive wins | Subscription retention, expansion ARR, large-customer growth, recovery use cases and acquisition payback drive economics. | After-cost earnings progress toward the base implied net margin of 17.3% | Competition, credit losses or service costs make that margin trajectory unattainable | Margins, moat score and valuation multiple |
| SBC-adjusted profitability and dilution | Q2 FCF margin was about 15%, but TTM SBC of $342 million exceeded FCF of $304 million. | Financing and compensation remain consistent with 223.2M economic shares in the 2029 base case | Required capital or cumulative dilution materially exceeds the model without matching earnings | Financial score, confidence and downside value |

## Quality & Opportunity Scorecards

### Quality Score

| Component | Score | Weight | Weighted Contribution | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Business durability and economics | 85 | 25% | 21.3 | Subscription retention, expansion ARR, large-customer growth, recovery use cases and acquisition payback drive economics. |
| Moat and competitive position | 82 | 25% | 20.5 | Integrated recovery workflows, customer trust and data-policy switching costs create meaningful barriers. |
| Growth runway and durability | 90 | 20% | 18.0 | Cyber resilience spending benefits from growing data and attack exposure, but backup, security and cloud-platform categories overlap. |
| Financial quality and balance sheet | 64 | 15% | 9.6 | Q2 FCF margin was about 15%, but TTM SBC of $342 million exceeded FCF of $304 million. |
| Management, governance and capital allocation | 71 | 15% | 10.7 | Management has executed strongly on recurring growth and improved cash conversion. |
| **Quality Score** | **80.0** | **100%** | **80.0** | Weighted score, independent of ownership and current price |

- **Quality Tier:** A
- **Speculative override:** None

### Opportunity Score

| Component | Raw Input | Normalized Score | Weight | Weighted Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quality | 80 | 80.0 | 30% | 24.0 |
| Probability-weighted upside | -47.2% | 0.0 | 35% | 0.0 |
| Bear-case downside | -86.0% | 0.0 | 20% | 0.0 |
| Risk / valuation confidence | 54 | 54.0 | 15% | 8.1 |
| **Opportunity Score** |  | **32.1** | **100%** | **32.1** |

- **Opportunity Rank:** #62 of 76
- **Zone Status:** Avoid

## Portfolio Context

- **Tracking tier:** Primary Watchlist
- **Owned:** No
- **Tracking source of truth:** `my_watchlist.md`
- **Portfolio source of truth:** `portfolio/holdings.md`
- **Scoring independence:** Ownership, account, shares, position size and cost basis do not change research, valuation, Quality, Opportunity, rank or zones.

## Investment Decision History

| Timestamp | Price | Rating | Zone Status | Buy Zone | Strong Buy Zone | Avoid Chasing Above | Base FV | P/W FV | P/W Return | Quality | Opportunity / Rank | Change / Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-21 (America/New_York) | $114.59 | Avoid | Avoid | >$17.96–$49.17 | ≤ $17.96 | > $68.29 | $54.00 | $61.46 | -46.4% | 80.0 | 32.1 / #55 | Initial missing-file analysis; common-universe ranking; independent scenario assumptions |

---

## Material Sources

| Source | Type | Date / Period | What It Supports |
|---|---|---|---|
| [Rubrik - Rubrik Reports Second Quarter Fiscal Year 2027 Financial Results](https://ir.rubrik.com/news-events/press-releases/news-details/2026/Rubrik-Reports-Second-Quarter-Fiscal-Year-2027-Financial-Results/default.aspx) | Company IR / earnings filing | Q2 FY2027 | Latest operating results, guidance, products and financial supplement |
| [RBRK complete earnings-call transcript](https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/rbrk/transcripts/686066-q2-2027/) | Transcript | Q2 FY2027 | Prepared remarks and all material Q&A exchanges |
| [RBRK regular-session historical price](https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/rbrk/history/) | Market data | 2026-10-20 close | Common price used in returns, scores and zones |
| [RBRK valuation statistics](https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/rbrk/statistics/) | Market data | 2026-10-20 close; ratios retrieved 2026-10-21 | Market capitalization, shares, quoted multiples and current ratios |
| [RBRK historical income statement](https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/rbrk/financials/income-statement/) | Standardized financial statements | Latest reported period and two preceding fiscal years | Historical income statement; source-native currency and definitions |
| [RBRK historical balance sheet](https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/rbrk/financials/balance-sheet/) | Standardized financial statements | Latest reported period and two preceding fiscal years | Historical balance sheet; source-native currency and definitions |
| [RBRK historical cash flows](https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/rbrk/financials/cash-flow-statement/) | Standardized financial statements | Latest reported period and two preceding fiscal years | Historical cash flows; source-native currency and definitions |
| [SentinelOne, Inc. statistics](https://stockanalysis.com/stocks/s/statistics/) | Comparable-company market data | 2026-10-20 regular close | Peer multiples and financial context; public quote basis |
| [FY2026 10-K — named data-protection competitors](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1943896/000194389626000013/rbrk-20260131.htm) | Regulatory filing / primary product evidence | FY ended 2026-01-31; checked 2026-10-28 | Veeam, Cohesity, Commvault, Dell and IBM backup/recovery overlap |
| [SEC XBRL company facts — RBRK](https://data.sec.gov/api/xbrl/companyfacts/CIK0001943896.json) | Regulatory filing (as tagged) | FY2027, through 2026-07-31 | Current-year standalone-quarter and year-to-date source facts for FCF, SBC, revenue and other reported metrics |