NEURACAP
Sector ReportSep 28, 2026 · 22 pages · Free to read

Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Sector Outlook — September 2026

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

Download PDFDownload PowerPoint

Key figures

8.4x
Sector median EV/EBITDA
46.7x
Premium end EV/EBITDA vs 3.8x at the discount end
16
Transactions with disclosed terms

Read the report

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 › BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE AND ANALYTICS SOFTWARE

Analytics Software: Growth Separates Public Pricing

The report shows how business model, revenue quality and operating performance align with public pricing and transaction benchmarks.

September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential

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

Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice

1

1 / 22

Executive summary

Business Intelligence and Analytics Software contains distinct application, infrastructure, services and adjacent models. Public pricing is most clearly separated by revenue growth, while recurring revenue quality, retention, workflow depth and earnings durability shape how that growth is viewed. Precedent transactions reinforce the need for asset-level judgment: buyers assess software, data and services economics differently.

Key findings

  • Faster Growth Sits With the Higher-Priced Names
  • The Two Ends of the Market Are Far Apart
  • Balanced Performance Sits Alongside a Better Position
  • Revenue Quality Remains a Key Test of Defensibility

What each page shows

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

  1. 01

    INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY › SOFTWARE AND SERVICES › BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE AND ANALYTICS SOFTWARE

    INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY › SOFTWARE AND SERVICES › BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE AND ANALYTICS SOFTWARE.

    Cover — Business Intelligence and Analytics 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 › BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE AND ANALYTICS SOFTWARE Analytics Software: Growth Separates Public Pricing The report shows how business model, revenue quality and operating performance align with public pricing and transaction benchmarks. September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Market data as of 2026-09-28 · primary valuation basis EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 1

  2. 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 Growth and Revenue Quality Separate Public Pricing 02 The Landscape Different Analytics Models Earn Different Market Treatment 03 Valuation & Situations The Premium Sits with Faster-Growing Names 04 Precedent Transactions Precedent Transactions Reward Conviction, but Pricing Remains Asset-Specific 05 Strategic Implications Revenue Quality Expands the Paths Available to Owners 06 Appendix Comparables Detail, Methodology, Sources and Assumptions Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 2

  3. 03
    01 · THE BOTTOM LINE

    Pricing Differs Across Applications, Infrastructure and Adjacent Models in Business Intelligence and Analytics Software

    Pricing Differs Across Applications, Infrastructure and Adjacent Models in Business Intelligence and Analytics Software.

    Pricing Differs Across Applications, Infrastructure and Adjacent Models in Business Intelligence and Analytics Software 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 (13 of 16 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 30%, 13 of 16 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 Pricing Differs Across Applications, Infrastructure and Adjacent Models in Business Intelligence and Analytics Software 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 (13 of 16 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 30%, 13 of 16 names with a meaningful EBITDA), so EV / EBITDA leads and EV / Revenue is the cross-check. Qualitative characterisations are NeuraCap views. Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 3 1 Faster Growth Sits with the Higher-Priced Names Among 13 names with a forward estimate, the 7 growing above 12% carry 14.9x, alongside 7.9x for the 6 below that mark. The observed premium sits with faster growth. 2 The Two Ends of the Market Are Far Apart The premium end carries 46.7x, while the discount end carries 3.8x. A forward multiple already credits forecast growth, so the gap places added weight on durability. 3 Balanced Performance Sits Alongside a Better Position Among 4 names above both the growth and margin bars, pricing is 17.9x. Among 3 names below both bars, pricing is 7.6x. 4 Revenue Quality Remains a Key Test of Defensibility Recurring revenue, retention and customer expansion distinguish scalable software economics from services and project revenue. Embedded analytics, proprietary data and workflow depth also support a more durable position with buyers. 8.4x Sector median EV/EBITDA CY2027E consensus · 13 rated of 16 companies 46.7x Premium end EV/EBITDA vs 3.8x at the discount end top quartile (n=3) against bottom quartile (n=3) on EV/EBITDA — the spread the report explains 16 Transactions with disclosed terms 50 recorded in this tier · 3 told as case studies, the full list in the appendix

  4. 04
    SECTION 02

    02

    02.

    Section 02 of 06 — Different Analytics Models Earn Different Market Treatment. Workflow depth, proprietary data and deployment economics shape how the peer set is viewed. 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 Different Analytics Models Earn Different Market Treatment Workflow depth, proprietary data and deployment economics shape how the peer set is viewed. 02 of 06 Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 4

  5. 05
    02 · MARKET MAP

    Applications Are the Largest Group; Infrastructure and Adjacent Models Appeal to Different Buyer Types

    Applications Are the Largest Group; Infrastructure and Adjacent Models Appeal to Different Buyer Types.

    Applications Are the Largest Group; Infrastructure and Adjacent Models Appeal to Different Buyer Types 16 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 Applications Are the Largest Group; Infrastructure and Adjacent Models Appeal to Different Buyer Types 16 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. Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 5 DECISION-SUPPORT ANALYTICS APPLICATIONS 6 cos median 14.9x MSTR NIQ PDFS AMPL BKSY SSTI Decision intelligence and product analytics place the software directly inside operating workflows. DATA AND ANALYTICS INFRASTRUCTURE PLATFORMS 3 cos median 12.8x PLTR TDC REKR Data fusion and platform architecture can support broad deployment across customer environments. ADJACENT: ANALYTICS-ENABLED TECHNOLOGY SERVICES 2 cos median 6.8x IT CLVT Technology services combine analytics access with delivery capacity and established customer relationships. ADJACENT MODELS 5 cos median 8.2x RELX MORN CTEV GENI RDCM Information, data and sector-specific models widen the set beyond recurring software.

  6. 06
    02 · LANDSCAPE

    The Sector Spans Four Models with Different Economics and Buyer Groups

    The Sector Spans Four Models with Different Economics and Buyer Groups.

    The Sector Spans Four Models with Different Economics and Buyer Groups 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 The Sector Spans Four Models with Different Economics and Buyer Groups 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. Business Intelligence and Analytics 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 Decision-support analytics applications 6 38% 14.9x Strategy Inc (MSTR) · NIQ Global Intelligence Plc (NIQ) · +4 more Decision support earns attention. This group represents 38% of the approved companies and embeds analytics in product, operational and planning decisions. Workflow depth and customer expansion are central to its value story. Data and analytics infrastructure platforms 3 19% 12.8x Palantir Technologies Inc. (PLTR) · Teradata Corporation (TDC) · +1 more Infrastructure carries platform leverage. This group represents 19% of the approved companies. Cloud architecture, data fusion and deployment breadth influence its ability to support durable consumption growth. Adjacent: analytics-enabled technology services 2 13% 6.8x Gartner, Inc. (IT) · Clarivate Plc (CLVT) Services bring buyer access. This group represents 12% of the approved companies. Established customer access can be valuable, while implementation intensity and services dependence can temper software economics. Adjacent models 5 31% 8.2x RELX Plc (RELX) · Morningstar, Inc. (MORN) · +3 more Adjacent models widen the frame. This group represents 31% of the approved companies. Data rights, sector knowledge and information products can support defensibility beyond a conventional software model.

  7. 07
    SECTION 03

    03

    03.

    Section 03 of 06 — The Premium Sits with Faster-Growing Names. Forward pricing also places weight on the durability of forecast earnings. 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 The Premium Sits with Faster-Growing Names Forward pricing also places weight on the durability of forecast earnings. 03 of 06 Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 7

  8. 08
    03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION

    The Premium End Holds a Wide Lead over the Discount End

    The Premium End Holds a Wide Lead over the Discount End.

    The Premium End Holds a Wide Lead over the Discount End EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) · all 13 rated companies, sorted descending · sector median 8.4x · 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 (13 of 16 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 30%, 13 of 16 names with a meaningful EBITDA), so EV / EBITDA leads and EV / Revenue is the cross-check. 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. 8

    Everything on this page

    03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION The Premium End Holds a Wide Lead over the Discount End EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) · all 13 rated companies, sorted descending · sector median 8.4x · 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 (13 of 16 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 30%, 13 of 16 names with a meaningful EBITDA), so EV / EBITDA leads and EV / Revenue is the cross-check. 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. Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 8 PREMIUM · median 46.7x CORE · median 8.4x DISCOUNT · median 3.8x Sector median 8.4x WHAT SEPARATES THE TWO ENDS The premium end grows faster. The 46.7x premium-end pricing sits with names carrying faster forecast growth than the 3.8x discount end. Forward pricing tests durability. A forward EV / EBITDA multiple already credits forecast growth. A premium that remains on that basis places more weight on durable earnings and revenue quality. Business mix still matters. Subscription mix, retention, workflow integration and services exposure can distinguish companies with similar headline growth.

  9. 09
    03 · VALUATION DRIVERS

    Faster Growth Stands Out as an Observable Separator of Forward Pricing

    Faster Growth Stands Out as an Observable Separator of Forward Pricing.

    Faster Growth Stands Out as an Observable Separator of Forward Pricing 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=7; slower n=6; higher-margin n=7; lower-margin n=6). Driver readings are NeuraCap views on the supplied data — association, not causation. 9

    Everything on this page

    03 · VALUATION DRIVERS Faster Growth Stands Out as an Observable Separator of Forward Pricing 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=7; slower n=6; higher-margin n=7; lower-margin n=6). Driver readings are NeuraCap views on the supplied data — association, not causation. Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 9 EV/EBITDA, median per cohort · growth split at 12% · EBITDA-margin split at 30% The Growth Split Shows a Clear Pricing Gap Among the 7 names above 12% growth, pricing is 14.9x. Among the 6 names below that threshold, pricing is 7.9x. Growth Carries More Separation than Margin Alone Among 3 names clearing only the margin bar, pricing is 8.2x. Among 3 names clearing only the growth bar, pricing is 12.8x. Revenue Quality Strengthens the Growth Story Retention, subscription mix, consumption growth and customer expansion help distinguish durable growth from revenue that depends on services or customized implementation.

  10. 10
    03 · SITUATION MAP

    Growth and Pricing Positions Frame Choices on Investment, Pricing and Cost Discipline

    Growth and Pricing Positions Frame Choices on Investment, Pricing and Cost Discipline.

    Growth and Pricing Positions Frame Choices on Investment, Pricing and Cost Discipline Cut on EV / EBITDA vs the sector median (8.4x) (rows) and revenue growth vs the covered median (12%) (columns) · 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 Pricing Positions Frame Choices on Investment, Pricing and Cost Discipline Cut on EV / EBITDA vs the sector median (8.4x) (rows) and revenue growth vs the covered median (12%) (columns) · 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. Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 10 Higher Growth, Higher Pricing Above-median multiple · above-median revenue growth 5 names Palantir Technologies Inc. (PLTR) · PDF Solutions, Inc. (PDFS) · Amplitude, Inc. (AMPL) · +2 more Five names combine above-reference growth with above-reference pricing. The agenda is to protect retention, expansion and forecast durability. Lower Growth, Higher Pricing Above-median multiple · below-median revenue growth 2 names RELX Plc (RELX) · Gartner, Inc. (IT) Two names retain above-reference pricing despite below-reference growth. The agenda is to defend earnings quality while identifying credible routes to renewed growth. Higher Growth, Lower Pricing Below-median multiple · above-median revenue growth 2 names Genius Sports Limited (GENI) · SoundThinking, Inc. (SSTI) Two names show above-reference growth but below-reference pricing. The gap places attention on revenue durability, margin conversion and business mix. Lower Growth, Lower Pricing Below-median multiple · below-median revenue growth 4 names NIQ Global Intelligence Plc (NIQ) · Clarivate Plc (CLVT) · Claritev Corporation (CTEV) · +1 more Four names sit below both references. The agenda centers on sharper product focus, scalable delivery and a more durable recurring-revenue mix.

  11. 11
    03 · GROWTH VS PROFITABILITY

    Clearing Both Operating Bars Sits with Higher Forward Pricing

    Clearing Both Operating Bars Sits with Higher Forward Pricing.

    Clearing Both Operating Bars Sits with Higher Forward Pricing Revenue growth (CY2027E, x-axis) vs EBITDA margin (CY2027E, y-axis) · 13 companies with both estimates · cuts at the covered medians (12% growth, 30% 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=4; margin-only n=3; growth-only n=3; neither n=3). 11

    Everything on this page

    03 · GROWTH VS PROFITABILITY Clearing Both Operating Bars Sits with Higher Forward Pricing Revenue growth (CY2027E, x-axis) vs EBITDA margin (CY2027E, y-axis) · 13 companies with both estimates · cuts at the covered medians (12% growth, 30% 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=4; margin-only n=3; growth-only n=3; neither n=3). Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 11 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 20% 40% 60% MARGIN ONLY median 8.2x BALANCED median 17.9x NEITHER median 7.6x GROWTH ONLY median 12.8x CLVT TDC IT CTEV NIQ RELX SSTI AMPL REKR PDFS GENI BKSY PLTR x: revenue growth (CY2027E) · y: EBITDA margin (CY2027E) HOW TO READ THIS The chart separates growth and margin performance across the 13 names with a forward estimate. Among 4 names above both bars, pricing is 17.9x. Among 3 names below both bars, pricing is 7.6x. The two mixed groups show that growth and profitability can support different paths to market standing. The balanced median rests on 4 names and is lifted by PLTR at 61.6x. The growth-only median rests on 3 names and is lifted by AMPL at 46.7x. Rule of 40 (revenue growth + EBITDA margin ≥ 40%): 7 of 13 names clear it.

  12. 12
    03 · THE AGENDA

    The Right Operating Path Depends on Revenue Quality and Earnings Durability

    The Right Operating Path Depends on Revenue Quality and Earnings Durability.

    The Right Operating Path Depends on Revenue Quality and Earnings Durability 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 Path Depends on Revenue Quality and Earnings Durability 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. Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 12 Deepen Embedded Analytics Greater workflow integration can increase product relevance and support customer expansion without relying on stand-alone dashboarding. What changes the answer: Customer expansion improves where analytics sits directly inside recurring operating workflows. Improve Revenue Mix A greater contribution from subscription, cloud and consumption revenue can strengthen visibility and reduce dependence on customized services. What changes the answer: Retention and recurring revenue improve while implementation intensity declines. Resolve Build Versus Buy Product gaps in data fusion, semantic layers or sector workflows can be addressed through internal investment or selected acquisitions. What changes the answer: The cost and time required to build exceed the value of acquiring an established capability.

  13. 13
    SECTION 04

    04

    04.

    Section 04 of 06 — Precedent Transactions Reward Conviction, but Pricing Remains Asset-Specific. Buyer type, recurring revenue quality and earnings maturity matter at the transaction level. 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 Precedent Transactions Reward Conviction, but Pricing Remains Asset-Specific Buyer type, recurring revenue quality and earnings maturity matter at the transaction level. 04 of 06 Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 13

  14. 14
    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES

    Transaction Pricing Appears to Reflect Buyer Logic More than a Single Sector Benchmark

    Transaction Pricing Appears to Reflect Buyer Logic More than a Single Sector Benchmark.

    Transaction Pricing Appears to Reflect Buyer Logic More than a Single Sector Benchmark 3 of 16 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; duplicate precedent id; financial target ev not meaningful); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 34 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);

    Everything on this page

    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES Transaction Pricing Appears to Reflect Buyer Logic More than a Single Sector Benchmark 3 of 16 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; duplicate precedent id; financial target ev not meaningful); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 34 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. Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 14 Jan-2026 $5.7B Onward AcquireCo, Inc. Onward AcquireCo, Inc. placed a large whole-company value on OneStream, Inc. EV / LTM revenue 6.6x EV / LTM EBITDA n/a WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED The transaction suggests buyer conviction in an established analytics platform with enterprise relevance. Its scale also points to appetite for assets that can support broad customer workflows. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED OneStream, Inc. was valued at $5.7B and 6.6x revenue. The revenue benchmark is the relevant transaction cross-check. Feb-2023 $1.3B Francisco Partners acquires Sumo Logic, Inc. EV / LTM revenue 4.2x EV / LTM EBITDA n/a WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED Its inclusion suggests relevance to how buyers assess analytics assets. It adds qualitative context on buyer appetite across the sector. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED The transaction provides qualitative context alongside the disclosed pricing benchmarks in the selected set. Jul-2026 $279M Progress Software Corporation Progress Software Corporation acquired Domo, Inc. across revenue and earnings lenses EV / LTM revenue 0.9x EV / LTM EBITDA 18.7x WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED The transaction suggests interest in adding an analytics application to a broader software portfolio. Domo, Inc.'s role in decision support provides a clear product link. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED Domo, Inc. was valued at $279M, 0.9x revenue and 18.7x EBITDA. The two disclosed multiples show the different conclusions available from revenue and earnings benchmarks.

  15. 15
    SECTION 05

    05

    05.

    Section 05 of 06 — Revenue Quality Expands the Paths Available to Owners. Retention, workflow depth and scalable delivery strengthen both public and buyer perspectives. 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 Revenue Quality Expands the Paths Available to Owners Retention, workflow depth and scalable delivery strengthen both public and buyer perspectives. 05 of 06 Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 15

  16. 16
    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS

    Revenue Quality Is a Key Consideration in Strategic Flexibility

    Revenue Quality Is a Key Consideration in Strategic Flexibility.

    Revenue Quality Is a Key Consideration in Strategic Flexibility 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 Revenue Quality Is a Key Consideration in Strategic Flexibility 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. Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 16 FOR OWNERS Protect the Quality Behind Growth Retention, customer expansion and recurring revenue mix give growth greater durability and widen the range of credible strategic paths. FOR MANAGEMENT Separate Software from Services Clear operating ownership of software, data and services economics helps focus pricing, product investment and delivery capacity. FOR BOARDS Anchor Capital Allocation in Workflow Depth Investment priorities can center on embedded analytics, proprietary data and scalable deployment where these strengthen customer relevance.

  17. 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 Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 17

  18. 18
    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 1)

    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 (8.4x); amber marks below · 13 rated companies; 3 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. All 13 rated rows are in this appendix and in the companion workbook, which carries the complete field set. Names without an eligible multiple are listed in the companion workbook. 18

    Everything on this page

    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 1) Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier Teal shading marks a EV/EBITDA above the sector median (8.4x); amber marks below · 13 rated companies; 3 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. All 13 rated rows are in this appendix and in the companion workbook, which carries the complete field set. Names without an eligible multiple are listed in the companion workbook. Business Intelligence and Analytics 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 — ≥14.9x · median 46.7x · 3 companies Palantir Technologies Inc. PLTR Data and analytics infrastructure platforms $442B 61.6x 50% 59% 108 Amplitude, Inc. AMPL Decision-support analytics applications $1.6B 46.7x 16% 7% 24 PDF Solutions, Inc. PDFS Decision-support analytics applications $2.0B 20.9x 21% 30% 51 CORE — 5.1x–14.9x · median 8.4x · 7 companies BlackSky Technology Inc. BKSY Decision-support analytics applications $938M 14.9x 37% 33% 69 Rekor Systems, Inc. REKR Data and analytics infrastructure platforms $56M 12.8x 17% 7% 24 RELX Plc RELX Adjacent: analytics-enabled business services $69.8B 12.1x 7% 41% 47 Gartner, Inc. IT Adjacent: analytics-enabled technology services $14.1B 8.4x 4% 25% 29 Claritev Corporation CTEV Clinical and healthcare information analytics $5.1B 8.2x 5% 59% 64 NIQ Global Intelligence Plc NIQ Decision-support analytics applications $8.9B 7.6x 5% 25% 30 Clarivate Plc CLVT Adjacent: analytics-enabled technology services $5.2B 5.1x 1% 43% 44 DISCOUNT — <5.1x · median 3.8x · 3 companies Teradata Corporation TDC Data and analytics infrastructure platforms $2.4B 5.0x 1% 29% 30 SoundThinking, Inc. SSTI Decision-support analytics applications $62M 3.8x 12% 15% 27 Genius Sports Limited GENI Adjacent: digital information platforms $1.5B 3.6x 28% 32% 59

  19. 19
    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 16 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (50 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; duplicate precedent id; financial target ev not meaningful); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 34 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. 19

    Everything on this page

    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 2) All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 16 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (50 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; duplicate precedent id; financial target ev not meaningful); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 34 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. Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 19 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters Jul-2026 Progress Software Corporation → Domo, Inc. $279M 0.9x 18.7x Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Jan-2026 Onward AcquireCo, Inc. → OneStream, Inc. $5.7B 6.6x n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Nov-2025 Renesas Electronics Corporation → Similarweb Ltd. n/a 7.4x 24.1x Renesas Electronics Corporation agreed to acquire Similarweb Ltd. at 7.4x revenue and 24.1x EBITDA. The transaction links analytics capabilities with a buyer from outside the core software peer set. Apr-2025 Vector Capital Management, L.P. → Bigtincan Holdings Limited n/a 1.0x n/a Aug-2024 SilverBow Resources, Inc. → Brand24 n/a n/a 2.3x Jan-2024 Bain Capital Private Equity, LP → Firefly n/a n/a 9.3x Dec-2023 Clearlake Capital Group, L.P. & Insight Partners → Alteryx, Inc. n/a 4.7x n/a Clearlake Capital Group, L.P. & Insight Partners agreed to acquire Alteryx, Inc. at 4.7x revenue. The transaction suggests continued sponsor interest in established analytics software. Sep-2023 Cisco Systems, Inc. → Splunk Inc. n/a 7.7x 33.1x Cisco Systems, Inc. agreed to acquire Splunk Inc. at 7.7x revenue and 33.1x EBITDA. The transaction suggests that scaled analytics platforms can be assessed on both growth and earnings. Sep-2023 Investor Consortium → Innovation Holding Company Ltd n/a 9.7x 44.7x

  20. 20
    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 16 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (50 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; duplicate precedent id; financial target ev not meaningful); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 34 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. 20

    Everything on this page

    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (2 OF 2) All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 16 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (50 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; duplicate precedent id; financial target ev not meaningful); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 34 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. Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 20 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters Feb-2023 Francisco Partners → Sumo Logic, Inc. $1.3B 4.2x n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. May-2020 Flotek Industries, Inc. → JP3 Measurement, LLC $1M n/a n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Jun-2019 Salesforce.com, inc. → Tableau Software, Inc. n/a 10.9x n/a Jun-2018 Workday, Inc. → Adaptive Insights n/a 10.9x n/a Jun-2016 Thoma Bravo, L.P. → Qlik Technologies Inc. n/a 4.1x n/a n/a n/a → Similarweb n/a 2.7x n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; status defaulted announced. n/a Barcoding, Inc. → DecisionPoint Systems, Inc. n/a 0.8x n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved, status defaulted announced.

  21. 21
    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. 21

    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. Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice 21 VALUATION BASIS Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (13 of 16 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 30%, 13 of 16 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 Business Intelligence and Analytics Software and it clears the coverage gate with 13 of 16 companies (81%). EV / Revenue, P / E are carried as a cross-check. The set earns: 13 of the 13 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 27 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 585 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 (584) · home.treasury.gov (1). The companion workbook beside this deck carries the complete source index.

  22. 22

    The Higher-Priced Names Pair Growth with a More Durable Operating Story.

    The Higher-Priced Names Pair Growth with a More Durable Operating Story..

    Closing — The Higher-Priced Names Pair Growth with a More Durable Operating Story. 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. 22

    Everything on this page

    The Higher-Priced Names Pair Growth with a More Durable Operating Story. NeuraCap AI — Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Coverage September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Business Intelligence and Analytics Software Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 22

Sources and methodology

This report covers Business Intelligence and Analytics Software (Information Technology › Software and Services › Business Intelligence and Analytics Software) with market data and consensus estimates as of September 28, 2026. The company universe is the 16 listed companies whose core business is Business Intelligence and Analytics 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: Amplitude, Inc. (AMPL), BlackSky Technology Inc. (BKSY), Clarivate Plc (CLVT), Claritev Corporation (CTEV), Genius Sports Limited (GENI), Gartner, Inc. (IT), Morningstar, Inc. (MORN), Strategy Inc (MSTR), NIQ Global Intelligence Plc (NIQ), PDF Solutions, Inc. (PDFS), Palantir Technologies Inc. (PLTR), RADCOM Ltd. (RDCM), Rekor Systems, Inc. (REKR), RELX Plc (RELX), SoundThinking, Inc. (SSTI), Teradata Corporation (TDC). The market map groups them by business vertical — Decision-support analytics applications: 6 companies (MSTR, NIQ, PDFS, AMPL, BKSY, SSTI); Data and analytics infrastructure platforms: 3 companies (PLTR, TDC, REKR); Adjacent: analytics-enabled technology services: 2 companies (IT, CLVT); Adjacent models: 5 companies (RELX, MORN, CTEV, GENI, RDCM). 13 of the 16 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.

Scope and company universe

This report covers Business Intelligence and Analytics Software (Information Technology › Software and Services › Business Intelligence and Analytics Software) with market data and consensus estimates as of September 28, 2026. The company universe is the 16 listed companies whose core business is Business Intelligence and Analytics 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: Amplitude, Inc. (AMPL), BlackSky Technology Inc. (BKSY), Clarivate Plc (CLVT), Claritev Corporation (CTEV), Genius Sports Limited (GENI), Gartner, Inc. (IT), Morningstar, Inc. (MORN), Strategy Inc (MSTR), NIQ Global Intelligence Plc (NIQ), PDF Solutions, Inc. (PDFS), Palantir Technologies Inc. (PLTR), RADCOM Ltd. (RDCM), Rekor Systems, Inc. (REKR), RELX Plc (RELX), SoundThinking, Inc. (SSTI), Teradata Corporation (TDC). The market map groups them by business vertical — Decision-support analytics applications: 6 companies (MSTR, NIQ, PDFS, AMPL, BKSY, SSTI); Data and analytics infrastructure platforms: 3 companies (PLTR, TDC, REKR); Adjacent: analytics-enabled technology services: 2 companies (IT, CLVT); Adjacent models: 5 companies (RELX, MORN, CTEV, GENI, RDCM). 13 of the 16 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

27 records failed a validation gate and never feed a statistic in this report (27 excluded from aggregate). Each exclusion, with its reason: AMPL — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · BKSY — EBITDA 899000.0000 is below the $1000000 materiality floor; any multiple would be meaningless (effect: excluded from aggregate) · BKSY — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · BKSY — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · BKSY — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · BKSY — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · CLVT — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · CTEV — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · CTEV — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · CTEV — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · GENI — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · GENI — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · GENI — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · MSTR — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · MSTR — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · NIQ — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · PDFS — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · REKR — EBITDA is non-positive; EV/EBITDA is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · REKR — EBITDA is non-positive; EV/EBITDA is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · REKR — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · REKR — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · REKR — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · REKR — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · SSTI — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · SSTI — 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 (13 of 16 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 30%, 13 of 16 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 Business Intelligence and Analytics Software and it clears the coverage gate with 13 of 16 companies (81%). EV / Revenue, P / E are carried as a cross-check. The set earns: 13 of the 13 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: 13 of 16 companies; EV / rEVenue: 16 of 16 companies; P/E: 11 of 16 companies. 4 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 ≥14.9x, Core 5.1x–14.9x, Discount <5.1x — 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: 8.4x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) (13 rated companies) · 46.7x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within Premium tier (n=3) · 8.4x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within Core tier (n=7) · 3.8x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within Discount tier (n=3) · 14.9x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) | growth ≥ 12% (n=7) · 7.9x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) | growth < 12% (n=6) · 12.1x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) | EBITDA margin ≥ 30% (n=7) · 8.0x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) | EBITDA margin < 30% (n=6) · 44% = median Rule of 40 score (revenue growth + EBITDA margin) (n=13) · 17.9x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within balanced quadrant (n=4) · 8.2x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within marginOnly quadrant (n=3) · 12.8x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within growthOnly quadrant (n=3) · 7.6x = median(ev_ebitda CY2027E) within neither quadrant (n=3) · 61.6x = ev_ebitda CY2027E for PLTR (quadrant outlier) · 46.7x = ev_ebitda CY2027E for AMPL (quadrant outlier)

Precedent transactions: what is in the record and why

The precedent record holds the M&A transactions in Business Intelligence and Analytics 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. 50 transactions were recorded for this industry; 16 are shown. 34 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: 28 × deal value unit unresolved; 45 × no evidence record; 4 × duplicate precedent id; 1 × financial target ev not meaningful. 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. 589 source documents stand behind this report; by publisher domain: sec.gov, 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 Business Intelligence and Analytics Software?

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

Get a free sample reportBrowse the research