Sector ReportSep 28, 2026 · 23 pages · Free to read

Application Software Sector Outlook — September 2026

NeuraCap's Application Software sector outlook: who plays, how the market prices them, what has transacted, and what it means for owners, operators and acquirers.

Download PDF Download PowerPoint

11.2x
Sector median EV/EBITDA: 26.5x
Premium end EV/EBITDA vs 4.1x at the discount end: 25
Transactions with disclosed terms

1 of 23

$C:\Users\dawoo\OneDrive\Desktop\Deployments\neuracap_sector_reports_fable\Code\NeuraCap_Sector_Report_Pipeline_v2.1.0\ncsr\deck_kit\assets\logo_light_full.png$

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY › SOFTWARE AND SERVICES › APPLICATION SOFTWARE

Application Software: Five Markets, Uneven Pricing

The report shows where durable earnings, growth and recurring-revenue quality align with higher market pricing.

September 2026   ·   Prepared by NeuraCap AI   ·   Confidential

Market data as of 2026-09-28 · primary valuation basis EV / EBITDA (CY2027E)

Application Software Coverage   |   September 2026   |   Confidential   |   Not investment advice

Sources & methodology

1

1 / 23 · INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY › SOFTWARE AND SERVICES › APPLICATION SOFTWARE

Executive summary

Application software spans five pricing markets. Infrastructure platforms and horizontal suites occupy higher-priced ground than IT services, while the larger observed valuation spread sits across growth groups. Forward EV / EBITDA already credits forecast earnings, so premiums that remain are consistent with confidence in durability.

Key findings

Recurring software models occupy the higher-priced ground
The premium sits with the faster-growing names
The premium end still needs durable forward earnings
Announced transactions show what buyers agreed to pay

What each page shows

The analyst’s walkthrough of the deck, page by page.

01
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY › SOFTWARE AND SERVICES › APPLICATION SOFTWARE
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY › SOFTWARE AND SERVICES › APPLICATION SOFTWARE.
Cover — Application Software sector insights, September 2026. Prepared by NeuraCap AI; market data as of 2026-09-28; primary valuation basis EV / EBITDA (CY2027E). The framing line carries the deck's finding with the figures stripped. 1
Everything on this page
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY › SOFTWARE AND SERVICES › APPLICATION SOFTWARE Application Software: Five Markets, Uneven Pricing The report shows where durable earnings, growth and recurring-revenue quality align with higher market pricing. September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Market data as of 2026-09-28 · primary valuation basis EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 1
02
CONTENTS
What This Report Covers
What This Report Covers.
Contents — the report runs 5 numbered sections plus the appendix: the bottom line, the landscape, valuation & situations, precedent transactions, strategic implications. The Bottom Line comes first by design: a reader who stops after section 01 still leaves with the whole story. 2
Everything on this page
CONTENTS What This Report Covers 01 The Bottom Line Application Software Rewards Growth, Durable Earnings and Recurring-Revenue Quality 02 The Landscape Five Business Models Compete for Capital on Different Economics 03 Valuation & Situations Faster Growth Sits with the Higher Forward Earnings Multiples 04 Precedent Transactions Strategic Fit Supports a Wide Range of Agreed Transaction Pricing 05 Strategic Implications Strengthen the Revenue Mix Before Asking the Market to Reprice It 06 Appendix Comparables Detail, Methodology, Sources and Assumptions Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 2
03
01 · THE BOTTOM LINE
Application Software Splits Across Five Models, with Platforms and Horizontal Suites Priced Above IT Services
Application Software Splits Across Five Models, with Platforms and Horizontal Suites Priced Above IT Services.
Application Software Splits Across Five Models, with Platforms and Horizontal Suites Priced Above IT Services The full story on one page · figures on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), market data as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (62 of 84 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Practitioners also quote EV / Revenue in this industry; this set is profitable (median forward EBITDA margin 22%, 62 of 84 names with a meaningful EBITDA), so EV / EBITDA leads and EV / Revenue is the cross-check. Qualitative characterisations are NeuraCap views. 3
Everything on this page
01 · THE BOTTOM LINE Application Software Splits Across Five Models, with Platforms and Horizontal Suites Priced Above IT Services The full story on one page · figures on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), market data as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (62 of 84 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Practitioners also quote EV / Revenue in this industry; this set is profitable (median forward EBITDA margin 22%, 62 of 84 names with a meaningful EBITDA), so EV / EBITDA leads and EV / Revenue is the cross-check. Qualitative characterisations are NeuraCap views. Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 3 1 Recurring Software Models Occupy the Higher-Priced Ground Infrastructure and platform software sits at 15.9x, horizontal application software at 14.4x and adjacent IT services at 4.9x. The spread is consistent with different recurring-revenue profiles and professional services exposure. 2 The Premium Sits with the Faster-Growing Names The faster-growth group sits at 16.4x, compared with 6.1x for the slower-growth group. The observed spread remains meaningful on forward earnings. 3 The Premium End Still Needs Durable Forward Earnings The premium end sits at 26.5x versus 4.1x at the discount end. Because CY2027E EV / EBITDA already credits forecast growth, a premium that remains is consistent with greater earnings durability. 4 Announced Transactions Show What Buyers Agreed to Pay Clearwater Analytics Holdings, Inc. agreed to acquire Enfusion, Inc. for $1.0B at 24.7x EV / EBITDA. NEC Corporation agreed to acquire CSG Systems International, Inc. for $2.6B at 10.5x EV / EBITDA. 11.2x Sector median EV/EBITDA CY2027E consensus · 62 rated of 84 companies 26.5x Premium end EV/EBITDA vs 4.1x at the discount end top quartile (n=16) against bottom quartile (n=16) on EV/EBITDA — the spread the report explains 25 Transactions with disclosed terms 94 recorded in this tier · 3 told as case studies, the full list in the appendix
04
SECTION 02
02
02.
Section 02 of 06 — Five Business Models Compete for Capital on Different Economics. Recurring software, services mix and end-market structure separate the groups. Use this divider to reset the room before the section's pages; the progress dots show where the argument stands. 4
Everything on this page
SECTION 02 02 THE LANDSCAPE Five Business Models Compete for Capital on Different Economics Recurring software, services mix and end-market structure separate the groups. 02 of 06 Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 4
05
02 · MARKET MAP
Recurring Software Holds the Higher-Priced Ground Across Five Models
Recurring Software Holds the Higher-Priced Ground Across Five Models.
Recurring Software Holds the Higher-Priced Ground Across Five Models 84 approved companies grouped by business segment · median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) per group · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Segment grouping follows the platform's classification; group medians on rated names only. "Why it matters" lines are NeuraCap views. 5
Everything on this page
02 · MARKET MAP Recurring Software Holds the Higher-Priced Ground Across Five Models 84 approved companies grouped by business segment · median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) per group · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Segment grouping follows the platform's classification; group medians on rated names only. "Why it matters" lines are NeuraCap views. Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 5 HORIZONTAL APPLICATION SOFTWARE 38 cos median 14.4x SAP CRM SHOP DDOG CDNS WDAY DT TYL MANH PAYC BSY OTEX +26 more Horizontal suites combine broad workflows, installed bases and land-and-expand potential. INFRASTRUCTURE AND PLATFORM SOFTWARE 17 cos median 15.9x CRWD ZS RBRK TOST CHKP SAIL NTSK VRNS PRGS AVPT RPD TCX +5 more Platform products can become embedded in core technology workflows and security architecture. ADJACENT: IT SERVICES 14 cos median 4.9x ACN INFY CTSH GIB JKHY KD EPAM DXC ALIT GLOB NABL DAVA +2 more Project work and professional services exposure produce a different earnings and recurring-revenue profile. HEALTHCARE INFORMATION AND REVENUE CYCLE APPLICATIONS 3 cos median 9.6x HSTM CCLD AMWL Healthcare workflows add regulatory depth, procurement complexity and system-of-record relevance. ADJACENT MODELS 12 cos median 11.3x MSCI PAYX GLBE PBI PTRN SATL BTMD GIBO GNSS CHGG YHNA SNT These businesses bring software exposure through data, payments, logistics and other operating models.
06
02 · LANDSCAPE
Platform and Horizontal Software Price Above Services-Led Models
Platform and Horizontal Software Price Above Services-Led Models.
Platform and Horizontal Software Price Above Services-Led Models Segment view of the approved universe · EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) medians on rated names · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. "What they do / why it matters" is a NeuraCap view. Full company-level detail in the appendix and companion tables. 6
Everything on this page
02 · LANDSCAPE Platform and Horizontal Software Price Above Services-Led Models Segment view of the approved universe · EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) medians on rated names · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. "What they do / why it matters" is a NeuraCap view. Full company-level detail in the appendix and companion tables. Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 6 Segment n Share of universe Median EV/EBITDA Names to know What they do — and why it matters Horizontal application software 38 45% 14.4x SAP SE (SAP) · Salesforce, Inc. (CRM) · +36 more Broad suites set the pace. This group sits at 14.4x. Installed-base access, seat expansion and workflow breadth can support durable growth when retention remains sound. Infrastructure and platform software 17 20% 15.9x CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc. (CRWD) · Zscaler, Inc. (ZS) · +15 more Platforms hold higher ground. This group sits at 15.9x. Products embedded in core infrastructure can benefit from mission-critical use and expanding consumption. Adjacent: IT services 14 17% 4.9x Accenture plc (ACN) · Infosys Limited (INFY) · +12 more Services economics price differently. This group sits at 4.9x. Project exposure, labour intensity and a heavier professional services mix distinguish it from recurring software. Healthcare information and revenue cycle applications 3 4% 9.6x HealthStream, Inc. (HSTM) · CareCloud, Inc. (CCLD) · +1 more Regulated workflows add depth. Healthcare applications sit at 9.6x. Compliance requirements and system-of-record positioning can increase workflow importance while lengthening procurement. Adjacent models 12 14% 11.3x MSCI Inc. (MSCI) · Paychex, Inc. (PAYX) · +10 more Mixed models need separation. This group sits at 11.3x. Revenue mix, pass-through exposure and recurring software contribution need to be assessed business by business.
07
SECTION 03
03
03.
Section 03 of 06 — Faster Growth Sits with the Higher Forward Earnings Multiples. The premium remains after forecast earnings are already reflected in the denominator. Use this divider to reset the room before the section's pages; the progress dots show where the argument stands. 7
Everything on this page
SECTION 03 03 VALUATION & SITUATIONS Faster Growth Sits with the Higher Forward Earnings Multiples The premium remains after forecast earnings are already reflected in the denominator. 03 of 06 Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 7
08
03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION
The Premium End Pairs Faster Growth with Durable Forward Earnings
The Premium End Pairs Faster Growth with Durable Forward Earnings.
The Premium End Pairs Faster Growth with Durable Forward Earnings EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) · the 12 highest and 12 lowest of 62 rated companies · sector median 11.2x · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (62 of 84 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Practitioners also quote EV / Revenue in this industry; this set is profitable (median forward EBITDA margin 22%, 62 of 84 names with a meaningful EBITDA), so EV / EBITDA leads and EV / Revenue is the cross-check. The 38 mid-cohort names cluster near the median; the full set is in the appendix and companion tables. Tier zones are NeuraCap groupings cut at the rated set's quartiles;
Everything on this page
03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION The Premium End Pairs Faster Growth with Durable Forward Earnings EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) · the 12 highest and 12 lowest of 62 rated companies · sector median 11.2x · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (62 of 84 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Practitioners also quote EV / Revenue in this industry; this set is profitable (median forward EBITDA margin 22%, 62 of 84 names with a meaningful EBITDA), so EV / EBITDA leads and EV / Revenue is the cross-check. The 38 mid-cohort names cluster near the median; the full set is in the appendix and companion tables. Tier zones are NeuraCap groupings cut at the rated set's quartiles; every multiple quoted on this page is a median on the same EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) basis. Panel commentary is a NeuraCap view. Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 8 PREMIUM END — FASTER-GROWING SOFTWARE PLATFORMS · median 26.5x DISCOUNT END — SLOWER-GROWING AND SERVICES-EXPOSED MODELS · median 4.1x Sector median 11.2x WHAT SEPARATES THE TWO ENDS Faster growers cluster toward the top. The premium-end median is 26.5x, compared with 4.1x at the discount end. The ranking shows a wide forward earnings valuation spread across the approved companies. Forward earnings still matter. The CY2027E lens already reflects forecast earnings growth. Premium pricing that remains after that credit is consistent with confidence in earnings durability. Revenue quality sharpens the read. Net revenue retention, annual recurring revenue mix and professional services attach help distinguish repeatable software growth from lower-quality expansion.
09
03 · VALUATION DRIVERS
The Larger Valuation Spread Sits Across the Growth Divide
The Larger Valuation Spread Sits Across the Growth Divide.
The Larger Valuation Spread Sits Across the Growth Divide Median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) by revenue-growth cohort and by EBITDA-margin cohort (each split at its covered median) · rated names with estimates · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Cohort medians on rated names with the required estimates (faster n=30; slower n=29; higher-margin n=31; lower-margin n=31). Driver readings are NeuraCap views on the supplied data — association, not causation. 9
Everything on this page
03 · VALUATION DRIVERS The Larger Valuation Spread Sits Across the Growth Divide Median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) by revenue-growth cohort and by EBITDA-margin cohort (each split at its covered median) · rated names with estimates · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Cohort medians on rated names with the required estimates (faster n=30; slower n=29; higher-margin n=31; lower-margin n=31). Driver readings are NeuraCap views on the supplied data — association, not causation. Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 9 EV/EBITDA, median per cohort · growth split at 8% · EBITDA-margin split at 23% Faster Growth Aligns with the Higher Forward Multiple Above the 8% growth split, the group sits at 16.4x. Below it, the group sits at 6.1x. Growth Without Profitability Can Still Command a Premium The growth-only group sits at 24.9x, while the margin-only group sits at 8.6x. This is an observed association rather than evidence that growth alone determines valuation. Balanced Performance Supports a More Durable Story The balanced group sits at 15.2x. Its members clear both the growth and 23% margin bars, pairing expansion with visible forward earnings.
10
03 · SITUATION MAP
Growth and Forward Valuation Reveal Four Different Operating Positions
Growth and Forward Valuation Reveal Four Different Operating Positions.
Growth and Forward Valuation Reveal Four Different Operating Positions Cut on EV / EBITDA vs the sector median (11.2x) (rows) and revenue growth vs the covered median (8%) (columns) · 3 rated names without the second measure are not mapped · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Situation boundaries are the cohort's own medians (Directional, NeuraCap view). This page characterises situations; it does not recommend buying or selling any security. 10
Everything on this page
03 · SITUATION MAP Growth and Forward Valuation Reveal Four Different Operating Positions Cut on EV / EBITDA vs the sector median (11.2x) (rows) and revenue growth vs the covered median (8%) (columns) · 3 rated names without the second measure are not mapped · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Situation boundaries are the cohort's own medians (Directional, NeuraCap view). This page characterises situations; it does not recommend buying or selling any security. Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 10 Priced for Growth Above-median multiple · above-median revenue growth 23 names Salesforce, Inc. (CRM) · Shopify Inc. (SHOP) · Datadog, Inc. (DDOG) · +20 more This cell contains 23 names above both the valuation and 8% growth markers. The operating question is whether retention, pricing and unit economics can sustain the expectations already embedded. Premium Without Faster Growth Above-median multiple · below-median revenue growth 6 names SAP SE (SAP) · Manhattan Associates, Inc. (MANH) · Jack Henry & Associates, Inc. (JKHY) · +3 more This cell contains 6 names with above-market valuation and slower growth. Durable earnings, installed-base quality and margin resilience are central to defending that position. Growth Awaiting Recognition Below-median multiple · above-median revenue growth 7 names Workday, Inc. (WDAY) · Paylocity Holding Corporation (PCTY) · Pattern Group Inc. Series A Common Stock (PTRN) · +4 more This cell contains 7 names with faster growth and below-market valuation. Revenue mix, retention and the path from growth to forward earnings shape the potential for recognition. Rebuild the Operating Case Below-median multiple · below-median revenue growth 23 names Accenture plc (ACN) · Infosys Limited (INFY) · Cognizant Technology Solutions Corporation (CTSH) · +20 more This cell contains 23 names below both markers. The operating agenda centres on recurring-revenue quality, cost structure and sharper product focus.
11
03 · GROWTH VS PROFITABILITY
Wider Valuation Separation Sits with Growth, While Balance Aligns with Durability
Wider Valuation Separation Sits with Growth, While Balance Aligns with Durability.
Wider Valuation Separation Sits with Growth, While Balance Aligns with Durability Revenue growth (CY2026E, x-axis) vs EBITDA margin (CY2027E, y-axis) · 59 companies with both estimates · cuts at the covered medians (8% growth, 23% margin) · median EV/EBITDA per quadrant · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Quadrant cuts are the covered set's medians. Quadrant medians on names with a meaningful EV/EBITDA (balanced n=18; margin-only n=12; growth-only n=12; neither n=17). MSCI, CHGG plotted at the chart edge. 11
Everything on this page
03 · GROWTH VS PROFITABILITY Wider Valuation Separation Sits with Growth, While Balance Aligns with Durability Revenue growth (CY2026E, x-axis) vs EBITDA margin (CY2027E, y-axis) · 59 companies with both estimates · cuts at the covered medians (8% growth, 23% margin) · median EV/EBITDA per quadrant · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Quadrant cuts are the covered set's medians. Quadrant medians on names with a meaningful EV/EBITDA (balanced n=18; margin-only n=12; growth-only n=12; neither n=17). MSCI, CHGG plotted at the chart edge. Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 11 -20% 0% 20% 40% 0% 20% 40% MARGIN ONLY median 8.6x BALANCED median 15.2x NEITHER median 4.9x GROWTH ONLY median 24.9x CHGG KD CCLD MSCI VRNS SAIL FROG DDOG SHOP GLBE x: revenue growth (CY2026E) · y: EBITDA margin (CY2027E) HOW TO READ THIS The growth-only group contains 12 names and occupies the highest-priced quadrant. The balanced group contains 18 names and combines growth with profitability. Another 12 names clear the margin bar without clearing the growth bar. The remaining 17 names sit below both bars. Rule of 40 (revenue growth + EBITDA margin ≥ 40%): 24 of 59 names clear it.
12
03 · THE AGENDA
The Right Operating Move Depends on What the Market Already Credits
The Right Operating Move Depends on What the Market Already Credits.
The Right Operating Move Depends on What the Market Already Credits NeuraCap view · framed as the questions an owner or acquirer should resolve · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All content on this page is Directional — NeuraCap advisory judgment grounded in the cohort data shown earlier. It does not constitute investment advice. 12
Everything on this page
03 · THE AGENDA The Right Operating Move Depends on What the Market Already Credits NeuraCap view · framed as the questions an owner or acquirer should resolve · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All content on this page is Directional — NeuraCap advisory judgment grounded in the cohort data shown earlier. It does not constitute investment advice. Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 12 Defend a Premium with Durability Protect net revenue retention, deepen system-of-record use and keep acquisition cost payback disciplined. What changes the answer: Growth and valuation are already above the market markers. Convert Growth into Forward Earnings Improve subscription gross margin, standardise implementation and manage professional services attach. What changes the answer: Growth is above the market marker while valuation remains below it. Reignite Expansion from the Installed Base Focus product investment on seat expansion, cross-sell and repeatable land-and-expand motions. What changes the answer: Valuation is above the market marker while growth remains below it. Reset Mix and Capital Allocation Separate recurring software economics from lower-quality services and concentrate resources on scalable products. What changes the answer: Growth and valuation both sit below the market markers.
13
SECTION 04
04
04.
Section 04 of 06 — Strategic Fit Supports a Wide Range of Agreed Transaction Pricing. Product adjacency, installed-base access and recurring revenue shape the strategic read. Use this divider to reset the room before the section's pages; the progress dots show where the argument stands. 13
Everything on this page
SECTION 04 04 PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS Strategic Fit Supports a Wide Range of Agreed Transaction Pricing Product adjacency, installed-base access and recurring revenue shape the strategic read. 04 of 06 Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 13
14
04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES
Announced Deals Pair Different Forms of Strategic Fit with Agreed Terms
Announced Deals Pair Different Forms of Strategic Fit with Agreed Terms.
Announced Deals Pair Different Forms of Strategic Fit with Agreed Terms 3 of 25 transactions with disclosed terms, told as case studies · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · the complete list is in the appendix · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 78 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate precedent id); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 69 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed.
Everything on this page
04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES Announced Deals Pair Different Forms of Strategic Fit with Agreed Terms 3 of 25 transactions with disclosed terms, told as case studies · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · the complete list is in the appendix · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 78 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate precedent id); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 69 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. "Why the deal happened" is a NeuraCap read of the recorded evidence. Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 14 Nov-2024 $16.8B Emerson Electric Co. Emerson Electric Co. agreed to acquire Aspen Technology, Inc. in a scaled industrial software… EV / LTM revenue 15.4x EV / LTM EBITDA n/a WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED The transaction suggests strategic value in specialised application software tied to complex industrial workflows. Product adjacency and installed-base access provide the clearest strategic-fit read. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED The announced transaction valued Aspen Technology, Inc. at $16.8B and 15.4x EV / Revenue. That revenue cross-check sits alongside the deck’s primary EV / EBITDA lens. Mar-2022 $9.0B Thoma Bravo acquires Anaplan, Inc. EV / LTM revenue 13.4x EV / LTM EBITDA 12.8x WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED The case-study selection points to product adjacency, recurring-revenue quality and installed-base fit as the relevant strategic tests. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED The valuation read is benchmarked against the disclosed EV / EBITDA precedents in the transaction set. Mar-2023 $4.2B Blackstone Inc. Blackstone Inc. agreed to acquire Cvent Holding Corp. in a scaled event software transaction. EV / LTM revenue 7.6x EV / LTM EBITDA n/a WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED The transaction suggests sponsor interest in an established application platform with recurring customer relationships. The strategic read centres on platform scale, retention and expansion within the installed base. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED The announced transaction valued Cvent Holding Corp. at $4.2B and 7.6x EV / Revenue. That revenue cross-check complements the deck’s primary EV / EBITDA lens.
15
SECTION 05
05
05.
Section 05 of 06 — Strengthen the Revenue Mix Before Asking the Market to Reprice It. Retention, product depth and repeatable unit economics sharpen a company’s position. Use this divider to reset the room before the section's pages; the progress dots show where the argument stands. 15
Everything on this page
SECTION 05 05 STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS Strengthen the Revenue Mix Before Asking the Market to Reprice It Retention, product depth and repeatable unit economics sharpen a company’s position. 05 of 06 Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 15
16
05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS
Recurring-Revenue Quality and Forward Earnings Define the Operating Agenda
Recurring-Revenue Quality and Forward Earnings Define the Operating Agenda.
Recurring-Revenue Quality and Forward Earnings Define the Operating Agenda NeuraCap view · the questions this data puts on the table for the next twelve months Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. This page is Directional — NeuraCap views drawn from the analysis in this report. Observations, not recommendations. 16
Everything on this page
05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS Recurring-Revenue Quality and Forward Earnings Define the Operating Agenda NeuraCap view · the questions this data puts on the table for the next twelve months Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. This page is Directional — NeuraCap views drawn from the analysis in this report. Observations, not recommendations. Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 16 FOR OWNERS Know Which Economics the Market Sees The relevant distinction is between repeatable software economics and revenue that depends on services, custom work or declining licence estates. FOR MANAGEMENT TEAMS Link Growth to Durable Unit Economics Retention, subscription gross margin and acquisition cost payback show whether growth can translate into sustained forward earnings. FOR STRATEGIC BUYERS Test Product and Installed-Base Fit Product adjacency, cross-sell potential and workflow depth shape how an application asset fits an existing platform.
17
SECTION 06
06
06.
Section 06 of 06 — The Full Universe, Methodology and Sources. Comparables detail behind every figure in the body, the valuation basis, and where each underlying disclosure lives. Use this divider to reset the room before the section's pages; the progress dots show where the argument stands. 17
Everything on this page
SECTION 06 06 APPENDIX The Full Universe, Methodology and Sources Comparables detail behind every figure in the body, the valuation basis, and where each underlying disclosure lives. 06 of 06 Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 17
18
06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 2)
Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier
Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier.
Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier Teal shading marks a EV/EBITDA above the sector median (11.2x); amber marks below · 62 rated companies; 22 not rated (no eligible EV/EBITDA) · tickers link to the underlying source · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 32 of 62 rated names shown here; the remaining 30 rows are in the companion workbook beside this deck. Names without an eligible multiple are listed in the companion workbook. 18
Everything on this page
06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 2) Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier Teal shading marks a EV/EBITDA above the sector median (11.2x); amber marks below · 62 rated companies; 22 not rated (no eligible EV/EBITDA) · tickers link to the underlying source · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 32 of 62 rated names shown here; the remaining 30 rows are in the companion workbook beside this deck. Names without an eligible multiple are listed in the companion workbook. Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 18 Company Ticker Segment EV EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) Rev growth EBITDA margin Rule of 40 PREMIUM — ≥18.7x · median 26.5x · 16 companies Satellogic Inc. SATL Adjacent: aerospace and defence systems $925M 78.4x n/a 19% 55 Datadog, Inc. DDOG Horizontal application software $92.2B 66.6x 31% 25% 48 JFrog Ltd. FROG Horizontal application software $10.0B 64.3x 23% 20% 38 Shopify Inc. SHOP Horizontal application software $181B 49.5x 32% 19% 45 Varonis Systems, Inc. VRNS Infrastructure and platform software $5.2B 49.3x 18% 12% 31 SailPoint, Inc. SAIL Infrastructure and platform software $11.3B 37.5x 21% 19% 41 GitLab Inc. GTLB Horizontal application software $6.5B 32.7x 19% 15% 31 Navan, Inc. NAVN Horizontal application software $4.4B 26.7x 33% 15% 39 Cadence Design Systems, Inc. CDNS Horizontal application software $91.8B 26.2x 19% 49% 62 Manhattan Associates, Inc. MANH Horizontal application software $11.8B 25.9x 8% 36% 45 Zscaler, Inc. ZS Infrastructure and platform software $30.6B 25.3x 22% 29% 45 Agilysys, Inc. AGYS Horizontal application software $2.6B 24.7x 14% 26% 43 AppFolio, Inc. APPF Horizontal application software $6.9B 23.1x 18% 23% 40 Dynatrace, Inc. DT Horizontal application software $16.0B 20.1x 16% 31% 46 MSCI Inc. MSCI Adjacent: financial data and exchange operators $45.8B 19.3x 12% 62% 71 Gloo Holdings, Inc. GLOO Horizontal application software $414M 18.8x n/a 8% n/a
19
06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (2 OF 2)
Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier
Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier.
Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier Teal shading marks a EV/EBITDA above the sector median (11.2x); amber marks below · 62 rated companies; 22 not rated (no eligible EV/EBITDA) · tickers link to the underlying source · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 32 of 62 rated names shown here; the remaining 30 rows are in the companion workbook beside this deck. Names without an eligible multiple are listed in the companion workbook. 19
Everything on this page
06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (2 OF 2) Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier Teal shading marks a EV/EBITDA above the sector median (11.2x); amber marks below · 62 rated companies; 22 not rated (no eligible EV/EBITDA) · tickers link to the underlying source · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 32 of 62 rated names shown here; the remaining 30 rows are in the companion workbook beside this deck. Names without an eligible multiple are listed in the companion workbook. Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 19 Company Ticker Segment EV EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) Rev growth EBITDA margin Rule of 40 CORE — 6.1x–18.7x · median 11.2x · 30 companies Freightos Limited Ordinary shares CRGO Horizontal application software $31M 18.5x 3% 5% 15 Tyler Technologies, Inc. TYL Horizontal application software $15.3B 18.3x 10% 30% 40 AvePoint, Inc. AVPT Infrastructure and platform software $2.5B 17.0x 22% 24% 44 Global-e Online Ltd. GLBE Adjacent: specialty retail $6.1B 15.8x 39% 23% 51 Intapp, Inc. INTA Horizontal application software $2.6B 15.4x 14% 24% 38 The Descartes Systems Group Inc. DSGX Horizontal application software $6.4B 15.1x 14% 46% 59 Toast, Inc. TOST Infrastructure and platform software $15.9B 14.8x 21% 12% 31 Bentley Systems, Incorporated BSY Horizontal application software $10.6B 14.6x 13% 39% 49 SAP SE SAP Horizontal application software $246B 14.4x 6% 33% 45 American Well Corporation AMWL Healthcare information and revenue cycle applications $61M 13.3x -19% 2% 6 Alkami Technology, Inc. ALKT Horizontal application software $1.7B 12.8x 19% 22% 38 Jack Henry & Associates, Inc. JKHY Adjacent: IT services $10.6B 11.7x 6% 33% 39 Alarm.com Holdings, Inc. ALRM Horizontal application software $2.8B 11.6x 7% 21% 26 Paychex, Inc. PAYX Adjacent: staffing and employment services $38.8B 11.3x 9% 48% 54 Salesforce, Inc. CRM Horizontal application software $217B 11.2x 12% 38% 48 Workday, Inc. WDAY Horizontal application software $46.0B 11.1x 12% 35% 46
20
06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 2)
All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First
All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First.
All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 25 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (94 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 78 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate precedent id); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 69 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed.
Everything on this page
06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 2) All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 25 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (94 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 78 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate precedent id); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 69 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. 18 of 25 transactions shown; the rest are in the companion workbook. Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 20 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters Feb-2026 Thramann Holdings LLC → Auddia Inc. $0M n/a n/a Thramann Holdings LLC and Auddia Inc. show that the transaction set extends beyond scaled software platforms. Dec-2025 Cvent Atlanta, LLC → ON24, Inc. $300M 2.1x n/a Cvent Atlanta, LLC and ON24, Inc. suggest product adjacency within event and audience software. Oct-2025 NEC Corporation → CSG Systems International, Inc. $2.6B 2.2x 10.5x NEC Corporation agreed to acquire CSG Systems International, Inc. for $2.6B at 10.5x EV / EBITDA. Jan-2025 Clearwater Analytics Holdings, Inc. → Enfusion, Inc. $1.0B 5.0x 24.7x Clearwater Analytics Holdings, Inc. agreed to acquire Enfusion, Inc. for $1.0B at 24.7x EV / EBITDA. Nov-2024 Emerson Electric Co. → Aspen Technology, Inc. $16.8B 15.4x n/a Emerson Electric Co. and Aspen Technology, Inc. suggest a strategic fit around specialised application software. Apr-2024 Vista Equity Partners → Model N, Inc. n/a 5.0x n/a Vista Equity Partners and Model N, Inc. suggest continued interest in specialised application workflows. Feb-2024 Thoma Bravo → Everbridge, Inc. $1.7B 3.9x 22.9x Thoma Bravo and Everbridge, Inc. suggest value in embedded, mission-critical communication workflows. Mar-2023 STG Partners, LLC → Momentive Global Inc. n/a 3.0x 17.0x STG Partners, LLC and Momentive Global Inc. suggest a platform thesis around recurring customer engagement software. Mar-2023 Blackstone Inc. → Cvent Holding Corp. $4.2B 7.6x n/a Blackstone Inc. and Cvent Holding Corp. suggest interest in a scaled application platform with an established customer base.
21
06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (2 OF 2)
All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First
All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First.
All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 25 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (94 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 78 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate precedent id); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 69 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed.
Everything on this page
06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (2 OF 2) All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 25 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (94 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 78 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate precedent id); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 69 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. 18 of 25 transactions shown; the rest are in the companion workbook. Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 21 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters Feb-2023 Colombier Acquisition Corp. → PSQ Holdings, Inc. $198M n/a n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Sep-2022 EQT X Fund → BTRS Holdings Inc. n/a 7.9x 7.9x Apr-2022 GI Manager → GTY Technology n/a 6.6x n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Mar-2022 Thoma Bravo → Anaplan, Inc. $9.0B 13.4x 12.8x Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Jul-2021 AMETEK, Inc. → AvePoint US, LLC n/a 2.6x n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Dec-2020 Compass Diversified Holdings → BOA Technology, Inc. n/a n/a 15.1x Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Sep-2020 Eurazeo PME → EasyVista S.A. n/a 3.2x 24.6x Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Jul-2020 Black Knight, Inc. → Optimal Blue, LLC n/a n/a 38.7x Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Nov-2019 Open Text Corporation → Carbonite, Inc. n/a 2.8x n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved.
22
06 · METHODOLOGY
Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality
Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality.
Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality How this report was built, what was excluded, and where every underlying disclosure lives · as of 2026-09-28 Every figure in this report links to the record it was taken from. Where a figure has no link, the appendix names its source and the basis on which it was read. 22
Everything on this page
06 · METHODOLOGY Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality How this report was built, what was excluded, and where every underlying disclosure lives · as of 2026-09-28 Every figure in this report links to the record it was taken from. Where a figure has no link, the appendix names its source and the basis on which it was read. Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice 22 VALUATION BASIS Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (62 of 84 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Practitioners also quote EV / Revenue in this industry; this set is profitable (median forward EBITDA margin 22%, 62 of 84 names with a meaningful EBITDA), so EV / EBITDA leads and EV / Revenue is the cross-check. EV / EBITDA on CY2027E is the lead convention: it is the sector-appropriate prior for Application Software and it clears the coverage gate with 65 of 84 companies (77%). EV / Revenue, P / E are carried as a cross-check. The set earns: 65 of the 66 companies with a reported forward EBITDA carry a meaningful one, so the profit multiple leads and a revenue multiple would understate what the market is pricing. DATA QUALITY & EXCLUSIONS 78 records were excluded or quarantined by the platform's validation gates (unit errors, implausible ratios, ineligible securities and classification failures); the full ledger ships in the companion tables and never feeds a statistic in this report. DEFINITIVE VS DIRECTIONAL Definitive content is disclosed or consensus data passed through stated arithmetic. Directional content — tier boundaries, situation cuts, "why it matters" commentary, the agenda pages — is NeuraCap analyst judgment and is labeled as such where it appears. WHAT THIS REPORT IS NOT This report characterises a sector. It does not recommend buying, selling or holding any security, and no statement in it should be read as investment advice or a price target. WHERE THE DATA LIVES 3504 registered source documents stand behind the figures in this report. Metric hyperlinks throughout the deck open the specific filing or data record; by publisher: sec.gov (3503) · home.treasury.gov (1). The companion workbook beside this deck carries the complete source index.
23
Higher-Priced Names Pair Faster Growth with Durable Forward Earnings.
Higher-Priced Names Pair Faster Growth with Durable Forward Earnings..
Closing — Higher-Priced Names Pair Faster Growth with Durable Forward Earnings. The companion tables beside this deck carry the full universe, the exclusion ledger and the complete source index for any figure a client wants to trace. 23
Everything on this page
Higher-Priced Names Pair Faster Growth with Durable Forward Earnings. NeuraCap AI — Application Software Coverage September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Application Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 23

Sources and methodology

Scope and company universe

This report covers Application Software (Information Technology › Software and Services › Application Software) with market data and consensus estimates as of September 28, 2026. The company universe is the 84 listed companies whose core business is Application Software according to NeuraCap's industry classification of each company's reported business segments (a company is included only when this industry is central to what it does, not merely adjacent to it). Companies in the set: Accenture plc (ACN), Agilysys, Inc. (AGYS), Alight, Inc. (ALIT), Alkami Technology, Inc. (ALKT), Alarm.com Holdings, Inc. (ALRM), American Well Corporation (AMWL), AppFolio, Inc. (APPF), Alpha Technology Group Limited (ATGL), AvePoint, Inc. (AVPT), BlackLine, Inc. (BL), Bentley Systems, Incorporated (BSY), biote Corp. (BTMD), BTQ Technologies Corp. Common Stock (BTQ), CareCloud, Inc. (CCLD), Cadence Design Systems, Inc. (CDNS), Chegg, Inc. (CHGG), Check Point Software Technologies Ltd. (CHKP), CI&T Inc (CINT), Commerce.com, Inc. (CMRC), Freightos Limited Ordinary shares (CRGO), Salesforce, Inc. (CRM), CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc. (CRWD), Cognizant Technology Solutions Corporation (CTSH), Endava plc (DAVA), Docebo Inc. (DCBO), Datadog, Inc. (DDOG), Daily Journal Corporation (DJCO), Digimarc Corporation (DMRC), The Descartes Systems Group Inc. (DSGX), Dynatrace, Inc. (DT), DXC Technology Company (DXC), EPAM Systems, Inc. (EPAM), EverCommerce Inc. (EVCM), JFrog Ltd. (FROG), CGI Inc. (GIB), GIBO Holdings Limited (GIBO), Global-e Online Ltd. (GLBE), Globant S.A. (GLOB), Gloo Holdings, Inc. (GLOO), Genasys Inc. (GNSS), GitLab Inc. (GTLB), The Hackett Group, Inc. (HCKT), HealthStream, Inc. (HSTM), i3 Verticals, Inc. (IIIV), Infosys Limited (INFY), Intapp, Inc. (INTA), Jack Henry & Associates, Inc. (JKHY), Kyndryl Holdings, Inc. (KD), Lightspeed Commerce Inc. (LSPD), LegalZoom.com, Inc. (LZ), Manhattan Associates, Inc. (MANH), Mega Fortune Company Limited (MGRT), Mitek Systems, Inc. (MITK), MSCI Inc. (MSCI), N-able, Inc. (NABL), Navan, Inc. (NAVN), Netskope, Inc. Class A Common Stock (NTSK), Open Text Corporation (OTEX), Paycom Software, Inc. (PAYC), Paychex, Inc. (PAYX), Pitney Bowes Inc. (PBI), Paylocity Holding Corporation (PCTY), Progress Software Corporation (PRGS), Pattern Group Inc. Series A Common Stock (PTRN), Rubrik, Inc. (RBRK), Rimini Street, Inc. (RMNI), Rapid7, Inc. (RPD), SailPoint, Inc. (SAIL), SAP SE (SAP), Satellogic Inc. (SATL), Shopify Inc. (SHOP), Simulations Plus, Inc. (SLP), Senstar Technologies Ltd. (SNT), Sprout Social, Inc. (SPT), Tucows Inc. (TCX), Toast, Inc. (TOST), ReposiTrak, Inc. (TRAK), Tyler Technologies, Inc. (TYL), Vertex, Inc. (VERX), Varonis Systems, Inc. (VRNS), Workday, Inc. (WDAY), YHN Acquisition I Limited (YHNA), ZenaTech, Inc. (ZENA), Zscaler, Inc. (ZS). The market map groups them by business vertical — Horizontal application software: 38 companies (SAP, CRM, SHOP, DDOG, CDNS, WDAY, DT, TYL, MANH, PAYC, BSY, OTEX, FROG, PCTY, APPF, GTLB, DSGX, NAVN, ALRM, AGYS, INTA, VERX, EVCM, BL, ALKT, LSPD, LZ, MITK, DCBO, SPT, DJCO, GLOO, RMNI, SLP, CMRC, TRAK, DMRC, CRGO); Infrastructure and platform software: 17 companies (CRWD, ZS, RBRK, TOST, CHKP, SAIL, NTSK, VRNS, PRGS, AVPT, RPD, TCX, IIIV, CINT, BTQ, ZENA, ATGL); Adjacent: IT services: 14 companies (ACN, INFY, CTSH, GIB, JKHY, KD, EPAM, DXC, ALIT, GLOB, NABL, DAVA, HCKT, MGRT); Healthcare information and revenue cycle applications: 3 companies (HSTM, CCLD, AMWL); Adjacent models: 12 companies (MSCI, PAYX, GLBE, PBI, PTRN, SATL, BTMD, GIBO, GNSS, CHGG, YHNA, SNT). 62 of the 84 companies carry a valid multiple on the primary valuation basis and form the rated set behind every cohort statistic; the others are shown but do not enter the statistics.

What was excluded and why

78 records failed a validation gate and never feed a statistic in this report (1 excluded from universe; 75 excluded from aggregate; 2 quarantined). Each exclusion, with its reason: STRF — The security name identifies an instrument rather than an operating company (preferred) (effect: excluded from universe) · ALIT — EBITDA is non-positive; EV/EBITDA is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · ALIT — Implied EBITDA margin -113.3% outside the plausible band [-100%, 80%] (effect: quarantined) · ALIT — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · ALKT — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · AMWL — EBITDA is non-positive; EV/EBITDA is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · AMWL — EBITDA is non-positive; EV/EBITDA is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · AMWL — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · AMWL — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · AMWL — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · AMWL — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · BTQ — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · BTQ — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · BTQ — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · BTQ — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · CHGG — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · CHGG — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · CHGG — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · CHGG — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · CMRC — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · CRGO — EBITDA is non-positive; EV/EBITDA is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · CRGO — EBITDA is non-positive; EV/EBITDA is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · CRGO — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · CRGO — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · CRGO — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · further items are listed in the companion tables.

Primary valuation basis and how it was chosen

Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (62 of 84 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Practitioners also quote EV / Revenue in this industry; this set is profitable (median forward EBITDA margin 22%, 62 of 84 names with a meaningful EBITDA), so EV / EBITDA leads and EV / Revenue is the cross-check. EV / EBITDA on CY2027E is the lead convention: it is the sector-appropriate prior for Application Software and it clears the coverage gate with 65 of 84 companies (77%). EV / Revenue, P / E are carried as a cross-check. The set earns: 65 of the 66 companies with a reported forward EBITDA carry a meaningful one, so the profit multiple leads and a revenue multiple would understate what the market is pricing. The basis is selected in two steps: the industry's customary valuation conventions set the order of preference, and each convention is then tested for coverage — the share of companies with a valid, plausibility-checked multiple on the chosen period. A convention is used only when enough companies carry it; the best-covered convention is used, and disclosed, when none clears the threshold. Coverage measured for this report — EV / EBITDA: 65 of 84 companies; EV / rEVenue: 75 of 84 companies; P/E: 63 of 84 companies. 1 company shows a non-meaningful EV / EBITDA denominator and is excluded from that statistic. 8 companies show a non-meaningful P / E denominator and are excluded from that statistic.

How the multiples and statistics are computed

Enterprise value (EV) is market capitalisation at the as-of date plus total debt minus cash and equivalents from the latest reported balance sheet, reconciled against the platform's stored value and disclosed where the two differ. Forward multiples divide EV (or the share price for P/E) by the consensus estimate for the stated calendar period; trailing multiples use the last twelve months of reported figures from SEC filings. A multiple with a negative or immaterial denominator is treated as not meaningful and excluded from every statistic. Cohort statistics are medians and quartiles over the rated set only; a group median with fewer than three observations is shown as the single company's figure and labelled as such. Valuation tiers cut the rated set at its quartiles (tiers cut at the rated set's quartiles: Premium ≥18.7x, Core 6.1x–18.7x, Discount <6.1x — NeuraCap groupings). Revenue growth compares consecutive calendar-year consensus revenue; EBITDA margin divides consensus EBITDA by consensus revenue for the same period. Figures shown in this report and the calculation behind each: 11.2x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) (62 rated companies) · 26.5x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within Premium tier (n=16) · 11.2x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within Core tier (n=30) · 4.1x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within Discount tier (n=16) · 16.4x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) | growth ≥ 8% (n=30) · 6.1x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) | growth < 8% (n=29) · 11.3x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) | EBITDA margin ≥ 23% (n=31) · 10.2x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) | EBITDA margin < 23% (n=31) · 38% = median Rule of 40 score (revenue growth + EBITDA margin) (n=59) · 15.2x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within balanced quadrant (n=18) · 8.6x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within marginOnly quadrant (n=12) · 24.9x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within growthOnly quadrant (n=12) · 4.9x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within neither quadrant (n=17)

Precedent transactions: what is in the record and why

The precedent record holds the M&A transactions in Application Software recorded from SEC filings (8-K announcements and the documents they reference), newest first, with each value and multiple linked to the exact passage in the filing that states it. 94 transactions were recorded for this industry; 25 are shown. 69 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted because they say nothing about price; they remain in the companion workbook. Deal multiples are enterprise value over the target's last-twelve-month revenue or EBITDA at announcement, as disclosed; they are not restated to the public basis and no spread to the public multiples is claimed. Before a transaction reaches the record it passes a screen for mirrored or duplicate filings of the same deal, for divestitures where the filer is the seller rather than the buyer, for carve-outs recorded under the parent's name, and for values whose citation describes something other than the price paid (a debt raise, a termination fee); such records are corrected or excluded and the correction is noted. Data-quality notes on this record: 49 × deal value unit unresolved; 23 × no evidence record; 2 × duplicate precedent id; 4 × divestiture roles reassigned. Case studies lead with the 3 richest stories — disclosed value, a readable multiple, newest first.

Sources

Company financials and transaction terms come from the companies' own SEC filings on EDGAR (10-K, 10-Q and 8-K documents), linked from each figure in the report. Forward figures are analyst consensus estimates for the calendar periods shown. Share prices and market capitalisations are market data as of September 28, 2026. Treasury yields are published by the U.S. Department of the Treasury. 3508 source documents stand behind this report; by publisher domain: sec.gov (3503), home.treasury.gov (1). Every figure on every page is traceable to one of these records; nothing in the report is derived from outside data.

Interpretation and important notice

Tier labels, situation maps, the agenda and the implications pages are NeuraCap analytical views drawn from the recorded evidence and are labelled as such. The report is informational: it is not investment advice, not a recommendation to buy or sell any security, not an opinion of value and not an offer of any kind. Readers should perform their own diligence before acting on anything described here.

This report is published for information only. It is not a recommendation to buy or sell any security, an offer or solicitation, an appraisal or a fairness opinion, and no fiduciary relationship is created by reading it. Multiples that fail NeuraCap’s plausibility gates are excluded and never plotted. See the full methodology and the disclaimer.

More coverage in Information Technology

Want this analysis for a company in Application Software?

Company valuation reports run the same method against a single business — public or private.

Get a free sample report Browse the research

Application Software Sector Outlook — September 2026

Key figures

Read the report

Executive summary

Key findings

What each page shows

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY › SOFTWARE AND SERVICES › APPLICATION SOFTWARE

What This Report Covers

Application Software Splits Across Five Models, with Platforms and Horizontal Suites Priced Above IT Services

02

Recurring Software Holds the Higher-Priced Ground Across Five Models

Platform and Horizontal Software Price Above Services-Led Models

03

The Premium End Pairs Faster Growth with Durable Forward Earnings

The Larger Valuation Spread Sits Across the Growth Divide

Growth and Forward Valuation Reveal Four Different Operating Positions

Wider Valuation Separation Sits with Growth, While Balance Aligns with Durability

The Right Operating Move Depends on What the Market Already Credits

04

Announced Deals Pair Different Forms of Strategic Fit with Agreed Terms

05

Recurring-Revenue Quality and Forward Earnings Define the Operating Agenda

06

Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier