Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Sector Outlook — September 2026

Read the report

SlidesScroll

1 of 25

←→Full screen

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY › SOFTWARE AND SERVICES › CLOUD INFRASTRUCTURE AND PLATFORM SERVICES

Cloud Infrastructure: One Label, Four Different Markets

A read on 34 cloud infrastructure and platform companies: where forward earnings multiples sit by segment, and what growth, margin and contract quality sit alongside the top of the range.

September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential

Market data as of 2026-09-25 · primary valuation basis EV / EBITDA (CY2027E)

Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice

Sources & methodology

1

← Previous

1 / 25 · INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY › SOFTWARE AND SERVICES › CLOUD INFRASTRUCTURE AND PLATFORM SERVICES

Next →

What each page shows

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

1. 01

   INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY › SOFTWARE AND SERVICES › CLOUD INFRASTRUCTURE AND PLATFORM SERVICES

   Cover page introducing the Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services sector outlook as of September 25, 2026.

   This report looks at 34 cloud infrastructure and platform companies to see where forward earnings multiples sit and why. We use EV/EBITDA on CY2027E consensus as the primary basis, with market data as of September 25, 2026, so what follows is where to focus the conversation.

   Everything on this page

   INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY › SOFTWARE AND SERVICES › CLOUD INFRASTRUCTURE AND PLATFORM SERVICES Cloud Infrastructure: One Label, Four Different Markets A read on 34 cloud infrastructure and platform companies: where forward earnings multiples sit by segment, and what growth, margin and contract quality sit alongside the top of the range. September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Market data as of 2026-09-25 · primary valuation basis EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 1

2. 02
   CONTENTS

   What This Report Covers

   Contents page listing the report's five sections plus appendix and previewing the bottom-line finding.

   We've built this report so the bottom line comes first — if you read only section one, you still get the full story. From there we walk through the market landscape, valuation and situations, precedent transactions and strategic implications, with the full comparables set in the appendix. That structure lets us move fast through the parts you already know and slow down where the decisions actually sit.

   Everything on this page

   CONTENTS What This Report Covers 01 The Bottom Line The Short Version: Four Businesses Under One Label, Priced Apart 02 The Landscape Platform Software Holds the Largest Block; Managed Services Sits Lowest on Price 03 Valuation & Situations One Label, a Wide Range of Prices: What the Top End Holds That the Bottom Does Not 04 Precedent Transactions A Thin Transaction Record Puts the Weight on the Public Set 05 Strategic Implications Revenue Mix, Contract Tenor and Capacity Ownership Are the Levers on This Page 06 Appendix Comparables Detail, Methodology, Sources and Assumptions Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 2

3. 03
   01 · THE BOTTOM LINE

   Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services: Platform Software and Managed Services Are Priced Apart

   The bottom-line page summarizing where the sector's forward EV/EBITDA multiples sit and why platform software prices above managed services.

   On EV/EBITDA for CY2027E, the sector median across the 24 rated names is 10.7x, but the range runs from a 6.0x lower quartile to a 19.1x upper quartile — one label is covering very different businesses. Platform software and data-layer names sit toward the top of that range, while managed services sits lowest, and the split lines up more with growth than with reported margin. Eight of the 24 rated names clear both a growth and a margin bar, and that's the group where the case is easiest to make. So the question this report answers is where a business sits in that range, and what it would take to move up it.

   Everything on this page

   01 · THE BOTTOM LINE Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services: Platform Software and Managed Services Are Priced Apart The full story on one page · figures on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), market data as of 2026-09-25 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-25; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (24 of 34 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 24%, 24 of 34 names with a meaningful EBITDA), so EV / EBITDA leads and EV / Revenue is the cross-check. Qualitative characterisations are NeuraCap views. Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 3 1 Buyers Are Pricing These Names Across a Wide Range On EV / EBITDA for CY2027E, the middle of the range is 10.7x across the 24 names with a forward estimate, out of 34 companies on the page. The upper quarter begins at 19.1x and the lower quarter ends at 6.0x, so one sector label is covering businesses the market treats very differently. 2 The Platform Layer Sits Above the Services Layer on Price Infrastructure platform and data-layer software is 38% of the 34 companies; cloud managed services and integration is 24% of them and its middle multiple is 6.3x. That gap sits alongside a difference in retained economics: owned fabric and data gravity on one side, resold capacity and utilisation-led services on the other. 3 The Higher Multiples Travel with the Faster Growers Split at the set's growth line, the 10 faster-growing names with a forward estimate sit at a middle multiple of 14.1x, against 9.5x for the 9 slower names below the line. With consumption-based revenue, growth here is largely retention plus expansion on committed spend, and the spread sits with growth rather than with reported margin. 4 Clearing Both Bars Is Uncommon: Eight Names Do It Eight of the 24 names with a forward estimate clear both the growth line and a 23% margin, among them Microsoft Corporation (MSFT), MongoDB, Inc. (MDB), Nutanix, Inc. (NTNX) and DigitalOcean Holdings, Inc. (DOCN). The seven names that clear neither bar sit at 8.8x, and that is the group where contract quality and counterparty credit carry the case. 10.7x Sector median EV/EBITDA CY2027E consensus · 24 rated of 34 companies 23.2x Premium end EV/EBITDA vs 3.6x at the discount end top quartile (n=6) against bottom quartile (n=6) on EV/EBITDA — the spread the report explains 4 Transactions with disclosed terms 35 recorded in this tier · 0 told as case studies, the full list in the appendix

4. 04
   SECTION 02

   02

   Section divider introducing the market landscape: what each segment sells and where it prices.

   Next we map the 34 approved companies into their business segments and show where each one prices on a forward earnings multiple. This sets up the rest of the section, so we know what we're comparing before we compare it.

   Everything on this page

   SECTION 02 02 THE LANDSCAPE Platform Software Holds the Largest Block; Managed Services Sits Lowest on Price What each of the four groups sells, and where the forward earnings multiple lands. 02 of 06 Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 4

5. 05
   02 · MARKET MAP

   Most of the Set Sits in Platform Software and Managed Services

   A segment map showing that most of the 34-company set sits in platform software and managed services, with a median EV/EBITDA per group.

   Platform software and managed services hold most of this 34-company set, and each group carries its own median forward multiple. Seeing the weight of the set this way tells us which segment is actually driving the sector average, rather than treating the label as one business. That's the frame we carry into the next page, where we look at what each segment sells and why it prices where it does.

   Everything on this page

   02 · MARKET MAP Most of the Set Sits in Platform Software and Managed Services 34 approved companies grouped by business segment · median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) per group · as of 2026-09-25 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-25; 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. Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 5 INFRASTRUCTURE PLATFORM AND DATA-LAYER SOFTWARE 13 cos median 14.1x MSFT ORCL NET CRWV TWLO MDB AKAM NTNX DOCN RXT BLZE TUYA XNET The largest block at 13 of the 34 companies: the layer that owns the workload and the data sitting on it. CLOUD MANAGED SERVICES AND INTEGRATION 8 cos median 6.3x IBM IREN SAIC NSIT WYFI UIS GDYN CSPI Eight names selling migration, integration and run services on other people's capacity, where utilisation and contract renewal do the work. CLOUD-DELIVERED APPLICATION PLATFORMS 7 cos median 14.4x NBIS ESTC PEGA FSLY KC GLOO DMRC Seven names selling software delivered as a service, where net revenue retention and expansion on committed spend carry the story. HYPERSCALE AND AI SYSTEMS SUPPLY 6 cos 13.4x · 1 rated DELL HPE IONQ IONQ-WT QBTS RGTI Six names supplying systems and accelerated capacity into the build-out; one of the six carries a forward estimate.

6. 06
   02 · LANDSCAPE

   Four Segments, One Label: What Each Group Sells and Where It Prices

   A description of what each of the four segments sells and where its median EV/EBITDA multiple lands.

   Each of the four segments in this set sells a different thing — from owned infrastructure to resold capacity — and that difference shows up directly in the multiple. We lay out what each group does and where it prices, on the same EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) basis, so the comparison is apples to apples. The full company-level detail behind these group medians sits in the appendix if you want to trace any single name.

   Everything on this page

   02 · LANDSCAPE Four Segments, One Label: What Each Group Sells and Where It Prices Segment view of the approved universe · EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) medians on rated names · as of 2026-09-25 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-25; 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. Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services 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 Infrastructure platform and data-layer software 13 38% 14.1x Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) · Oracle Corporation (ORCL) · +11 more Owns the workload and data. Thirteen names, 38% of the set, and 10 of them carry a forward estimate — the deepest coverage of the four groups. This is where data gravity, developer distribution and control of the platform layer sit, and three of the six premium-tier names come from this group. Cloud managed services and integration 8 24% 6.3x International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) · IREN Limited (IREN) · +6 more Runs other people's capacity. Eight names, 24% of the set, with a middle multiple of 6.3x on the seven that carry a forward estimate. Earnings here are struck on utilisation, cost take-out and contract renewal, and private equity has historically been the natural buyer pool for recurring-contract service assets. Cloud-delivered application platforms 7 21% 14.4x Nebius Group N.V. (NBIS) · Elastic N.V. (ESTC) · +5 more Sells software delivered as service. Seven names, 21% of the set, and the six with a forward estimate carry a middle multiple of 14.4x — the highest of the four segment levels on this page. Retention and expansion on committed spend do more of the work here than raw capacity does. Hyperscale and AI systems supply 6 18% 13.4x n=1 Dell Technologies Inc. (DELL) · Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company (HPE) · +4 more Supplies systems and accelerated capacity. Six names, 18% of the set, but only one of the six carries a forward estimate, at 13.4x. Read the group on supply position — allocation relationships, power and order backlog — rather than on that single mark.

7. 07
   SECTION 03

   03

   Section divider introducing the ranked public-market valuation view across the rated set.

   From here we rank all 24 rated companies on EV/EBITDA for CY2027E and mark where the premium and discount ends sit. That ranking is what lets us talk about specific situations rather than just a sector average.

   Everything on this page

   SECTION 03 03 VALUATION & SITUATIONS One Label, a Wide Range of Prices: What the Top End Holds That the Bottom Does Not The ranked view on EV / EBITDA for CY2027E, with the premium and discount ends marked. 03 of 06 Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 7

8. 08
   03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION

   Top of the Range Holds a 23.2x Forward Multiple That Already Credits Forecast Growth

   A ranked chart of all 24 rated companies on EV/EBITDA (CY2027E), showing the top of the range at 23.2x against a sector median of 10.7x.

   The top of this range holds a 23.2x forward multiple against a sector median of 10.7x, and that premium already has forecast growth built into it. Every multiple on this page sits on the same EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) basis, so the tiers reflect where the market actually draws the line, not where we drew it. So the practical question becomes what it would take for a name lower in the range to earn its way toward that top tier.

   Everything on this page

   03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION Top of the Range Holds a 23.2x Forward Multiple That Already Credits Forecast Growth EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) · all 24 rated companies, sorted descending · sector median 10.7x · as of 2026-09-25 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-25; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (24 of 34 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 24%, 24 of 34 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. Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 8 PREMIUM · median 23.2x CORE · median 10.7x DISCOUNT · median 3.6x Sector median 10.7x WHAT SEPARATES THE TWO ENDS The top sells platform control. Six names sit at the premium end, with a middle multiple of 23.2x. These are data-layer, edge and developer-led platforms, where switching costs sit in the data and the workload rather than in the hardware. The bottom sells delivered capacity. Six names sit at the discount end, with a middle multiple of 3.6x. These businesses carry capacity, hardware vintage and utilisation risk, and depreciation policy, take-or-pay commitments and merchant compute exposure all sit close to the line the multiple is struck on. Forward multiples already credit growth. The lens is EV / EBITDA for CY2027E, so forecast profit growth is already inside the denominator. A premium that survives that test points to durability in the contract base rather than to expectations still to be earned.

9. 09
   03 · VALUATION DRIVERS

   Growth Above 13% Travels with the Higher Multiples Here

   A comparison of median EV/EBITDA by revenue-growth cohort and by EBITDA-margin cohort, split at the covered set's medians.

   Names growing revenue faster than the set's median carry a higher forward multiple here, and that pattern holds when we cut the same set by margin. We read this as an association in the data we have, not a proven cause, but it's a consistent one across both cuts. That's useful because it tells us where to look first when we're trying to understand why one business prices above another.

   Everything on this page

   03 · VALUATION DRIVERS Growth Above 13% Travels with the Higher Multiples Here 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 2026-09-25 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-25; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Cohort medians on rated names with the required estimates (faster n=10; slower n=9; higher-margin n=12; lower-margin n=11). Driver readings are NeuraCap views on the supplied data — association, not causation. Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 9 EV/EBITDA, median per cohort · growth split at 13% · EBITDA-margin split at 25% The Faster Half Prices Higher Split at 13% revenue growth, the 10 faster-growing names with a forward estimate sit at a middle multiple of 14.1x, against 9.5x for the 9 slower names. Both groups come from the 24 names with a forward estimate, so treat the split as a direction of travel rather than as a price. Margin on Its Own Moves It Less On the two names that clear the margin bar without clearing the growth bar, the middle multiple is 11.3x — nearer the centre of the range than the top, and a two-name base. Reported margin here also reflects depreciation policy on fast-moving hardware, so it is read alongside capital intensity. Owned Fabric Versus Resold Capacity Two capacity-owning names with a forward estimate, CoreWeave, Inc. (CRWV) at 5.2x and IREN Limited (IREN) at 4.9x, sit toward the bottom of the rated range, while Nutanix, Inc. (NTNX), selling the platform layer across hybrid estates, sits at 21.4x. The contrast is an association, not a rule. Contract Quality Is the Swing Factor The figures on this page do not measure contract structure, but it is what buyers underwrite: tenor, counterparty credit, change-of-control and assignment terms, and re-pricing mechanics on anchor accounts. In our experience, two companies with the same growth rate can be underwritten very differently on those terms alone.

10. 10
    03 · SITUATION MAP

    Seven Names Pair a Higher Multiple with Faster Growth; Four Hold the Multiple on Slower Growth

    A situation map cutting the rated set on EV/EBITDA versus the sector median and revenue growth versus the covered median, identifying seven names that pair a higher multiple with faster growth and four that hold the multiple on slower growth.

    Seven names in this set pair a higher-than-median multiple with faster-than-median growth, while four hold a higher multiple even with slower growth — and that second group is worth a closer look. These are observations built on the cohort's own medians, not recommendations on any security. What they tell us is that growth alone doesn't fully explain who sits where, which is exactly the kind of situation a diligence conversation should start from.

    Everything on this page

    03 · SITUATION MAP Seven Names Pair a Higher Multiple with Faster Growth; Four Hold the Multiple on Slower Growth Cut on EV / EBITDA vs the sector median (10.7x) (rows) and revenue growth vs the covered median (13%) (columns) · 5 rated names without the second measure are not mapped · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-25; 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. Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 10 Priced and Growing Above-median multiple · above-median revenue growth 7 names Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) · Dell Technologies Inc. (DELL) · MongoDB, Inc. (MDB) · +4 more Seven names sit above the set's middle multiple and above its growth line, including Microsoft Corporation (MSFT), MongoDB, Inc. (MDB) and DigitalOcean Holdings, Inc. (DOCN). For an owner here the live question is tenor: how much of that growth is committed spend, and how much is on-demand consumption that reprices each year. Priced Ahead of Growth Above-median multiple · below-median revenue growth 4 names International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) · Twilio Inc. (TWLO) · Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) · +1 more Four names hold an above-middle multiple on below-middle growth: International Business Machines Corporation (IBM), Twilio Inc. (TWLO), Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) and Fastly, Inc. (FSLY). The price is resting on installed base, contract tenor and a margin path rather than on pace. Growing Ahead of Price Below-median multiple · above-median revenue growth 3 names Oracle Corporation (ORCL) · Akamai Technologies, Inc. (AKAM) · Kingsoft Cloud Holdings Limited (KC) Three names grow faster than the set's middle and price below it: Oracle Corporation (ORCL), Akamai Technologies, Inc. (AKAM) and Kingsoft Cloud Holdings Limited (KC). In our reading, the gap usually sits with capital intensity, counterparty mix and where the workloads are permitted to run. Below on Both Counts Below-median multiple · below-median revenue growth 5 names Insight Enterprises, Inc. (NSIT) · Pegasystems Inc. (PEGA) · Unisys Corporation (UIS) · +2 more Five names sit below the middle on both measures: Insight Enterprises, Inc. (NSIT), Pegasystems Inc. (PEGA), Unisys Corporation (UIS), Grid Dynamics Holdings, Inc. (GDYN) and Tuya Inc. (TUYA). Mix is the lever in this group — shifting revenue from resold capacity and project work toward contracted, recurring platform revenue.

11. 11
    03 · GROWTH VS PROFITABILITY

    Eight Names Clear Both the Growth and Margin Bars; Seven Clear Neither

    A quadrant view of revenue growth against EBITDA margin for the 19 companies with both estimates, showing eight names clear both bars and seven clear neither.

    Eight of the 19 companies with both a growth and a margin estimate clear both bars, and seven clear neither — the middle ground is thin. The quadrant cuts are the covered set's own medians, so this is a relative read within the sector, not an absolute pass or fail. For an owner or acquirer, knowing which quadrant a business sits in is a fast way to frame what's already working and what still needs proof.

    Everything on this page

    03 · GROWTH VS PROFITABILITY Eight Names Clear Both the Growth and Margin Bars; Seven Clear Neither Revenue growth (CY2027E, x-axis) vs EBITDA margin (CY2027E, y-axis) · 19 companies with both estimates · cuts at the covered medians (13% growth, 23% margin) · median EV/EBITDA per quadrant · as of 2026-09-25 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-25; 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=8; margin-only n=2; growth-only n=2; neither n=7). Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 11 0% 20% 40% 20% 40% 60% MARGIN ONLY median 11.3x BALANCED median 14.1x NEITHER median 8.8x GROWTH ONLY median 16.2x UIS SAIC NSIT IBM PEGA GDYN TWLO TUYA FSLY NTNX AKAM ESTC MDB MSFT DELL BLZE KC ORCL DOCN x: revenue growth (CY2027E) · y: EBITDA margin (CY2027E) HOW TO READ THIS Read it as two bars: 13% revenue growth across, 23% margin up. Eight of the 24 names with a forward estimate clear both, among them Microsoft Corporation (MSFT), Oracle Corporation (ORCL) and Backblaze, Inc. (BLZE); the seven that clear neither sit at 8.8x. The two clearing growth alone sit at 16.2x — a two-name group, so read it as direction rather than as a price. Clearing both bars is associated with the upper part of the range. Rule of 40 (revenue growth + EBITDA margin ≥ 40%): 7 of 19 names clear it.

12. 12
    03 · THE AGENDA

    Where You Sit in the Range Tracks with Four Calls: Mix, Growth, Margin and Capital Allocation

    A framing of four questions — mix, growth, margin and capital allocation — that track with where a company sits in the valuation range.

    Where a company sits in this range tracks with four calls it has made: revenue mix, growth investment, margin discipline and capital allocation. We frame these as the questions an owner or acquirer should be resolving, not as a scorecard, because the evidence here is directional. Getting explicit about which of these four levers is actually in play is what turns this data into a decision.

    Everything on this page

    03 · THE AGENDA Where You Sit in the Range Tracks with Four Calls: Mix, Growth, Margin and Capital Allocation 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 2026-09-25; 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. Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 12 Own the Fabric or Resell It Decide how much of your delivered capacity you own versus resell, because the two produce different retained margin per unit of workload. Among the names with a forward estimate, the capacity-owning businesses sit toward the bottom of the range and the platform-layer businesses toward the top. What changes the answer: A sustained move in gross margin on owned versus resold capacity across two reporting periods. Lengthen Tenor, Tighten Counterparties Work the reserved versus on-demand mix and the credit quality behind committed contracted revenue. Buyers in this sector diligence anchor-customer terms as hard as the revenue line, so tenor and concentration are positioning decisions, not administrative ones. What changes the answer: Renewal terms on the anchor accounts — assignment, change-of-control and re-pricing mechanics. Move up to the Platform Layer Control of the platform layer, data gravity and developer-led self-serve distribution are what the premium end of this set is made of. The practical question is which products you fund next: raw capacity, or the layer customers build on and find costly to leave. What changes the answer: Net revenue retention holding as the workload mix moves from training toward inference. Build, Buy or Fund the Build-Out Power, interconnect and accelerator allocation are the binding constraints, so capital structure is a competitive variable. Structured capital and minority growth capital are common ways to fund capacity without taking the whole build onto the operating balance sheet. What changes the answer: Interconnect and accelerator allocation timelines slipping against the capacity plan.

13. 13
    SECTION 04

    04

    Section divider introducing the precedent transaction record, noting it is thin relative to the public comparable set.

    The recorded transaction history in this sector is thin — four transactions, two with an earnings multiple attached — so the weight of the pricing evidence sits with the public set we just walked through. We still think the deals that are on record are worth a close read for what they say about buyer rationale.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 04 04 PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS A Thin Transaction Record Puts the Weight on the Public Set Four recorded transactions, two of them with an earnings multiple attached. 04 of 06 Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 13

14. 14
    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES

    Four Recorded Deals, and the Two Earnings Multiples Land Near the Set's Middle

    Case studies on the transactions with disclosed terms, showing the two disclosed earnings multiples land near the middle of the rated public set.

    Three of the four recorded transactions have disclosed terms, and the two with an earnings multiple land near the middle of the public range rather than at either extreme. These multiples are calculated on LTM financials at announcement, so they sit on a different basis than the CY2027E figures elsewhere in this report and we're not claiming a spread between them. Even so, seeing where actual buyers transacted is a useful cross-check against where the public market prices similar businesses today.

    Everything on this page

    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES Four Recorded Deals, and the Two Earnings Multiples Land Near the Set's Middle 3 of 4 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 2026-09-25 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-25; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 41 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate filings collapsed); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 31 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. Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 14 Dec-2020 n/a Despature Family acquires JD Cloud & AI business EV / LTM revenue n/a EV / LTM EBITDA 13.1x WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED Despature Family moved for JD Cloud & AI business in Dec-2020; the record shows it as announced. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED Terms were not fully disclosed; the transaction anchors the reference set rather than the price. Aug-2019 n/a VMware, Inc. acquires Pivotal Software, Inc. EV / LTM revenue 3.4x EV / LTM EBITDA n/a WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED VMware, Inc. moved for Pivotal Software, Inc. in Aug-2019; the record shows it as announced. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED Terms were not fully disclosed; the transaction anchors the reference set rather than the price. May-2019 n/a TimeFireVR Inc. acquires Red Cat Propware, Inc. EV / LTM revenue n/a EV / LTM EBITDA 10.6x WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED TimeFireVR Inc. moved for Red Cat Propware, Inc. in May-2019; the record shows it as completed. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED Terms were not fully disclosed; the transaction anchors the reference set rather than the price.

15. 15
    SECTION 05

    05

    Section divider introducing the strategic implications for owners, boards and acquirers.

    We close the analysis by turning the evidence into questions for owners, boards and acquirers — on revenue mix, contract tenor and capacity ownership. This is where the report moves from what the data shows to what it's worth doing about it.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 05 05 STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS Revenue Mix, Contract Tenor and Capacity Ownership Are the Levers on This Page What the evidence means for owners, boards and acquirers in this sector. 05 of 06 Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 15

16. 16
    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS

    Higher Multiples Sit Alongside Faster Growth and Higher Margins — Revenue Mix and Cost Structure Are Where to Work

    A set of strategic implications for owners, boards and acquirers built on the growth-margin-multiple pattern shown earlier.

    Higher multiples in this set sit alongside faster growth and higher margins, and that puts revenue mix and cost structure at the center of the conversation for the next twelve months. For owners, that means weighing recurring platform revenue against project work and resold capacity. For boards, it means treating contract concentration and capital structure as valuation questions, not just operating detail — and for acquirers, it means using the public range as the reference point when building conviction on any one name.

    Everything on this page

    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS Higher Multiples Sit Alongside Faster Growth and Higher Margins — Revenue Mix and Cost Structure Are Where to Work 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 2026-09-25; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. This page is Directional — NeuraCap views drawn from the analysis in this report. Observations, not recommendations. Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 16 FOR OWNERS Revenue Quality Before Revenue Pace The upper part of this range is populated by platform and data-layer businesses with expansion on committed spend behind the growth. Mix work — recurring platform revenue over project work and resold capacity — is the lever most under your control. FOR BOARDS Contract and Capital Structure Carry the Price Anchor-customer concentration, take-or-pay commitments and depreciation policy on fast-moving hardware all sit close to the earnings line the multiple is struck on. Those are board-level choices about risk transfer, not reporting detail. FOR ACQUIRERS The Public Set Is the Reference Here With four transactions on the record and two earnings multiples among them, the public range is doing most of the pricing work. Conviction on contracted cash flows, power position and platform control is what separates a defensible bid from a spreadsheet exercise.

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 Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 17

18. 18
    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 2)

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

    The first half of the public comparables table on EV/EBITDA (CY2027E), grouped by valuation tier, covering 24 rated and 10 unrated companies.

    This table lists the public comparables behind the report, grouped by valuation tier, with 24 of the 34 companies carrying a rated multiple and the rest unrated for lack of an eligible figure. Names above the 10.7x sector median are shaded one way and names below it the other, so the tier a company sits in is visible at a glance. The complete field set for every name here sits in the companion workbook.

    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 (10.7x); amber marks below · 24 rated companies; 10 not rated (no eligible EV/EBITDA) · tickers link to the underlying source · as of 2026-09-25 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-25; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All 24 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. Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services 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 — ≥19.1x · median 23.2x · 6 companies MongoDB, Inc. MDB Infrastructure platform and data-layer software $31.6B 39.0x 18% 23% 41 Twilio Inc. TWLO Infrastructure platform and data-layer software $44.2B 30.0x 12% 22% 34 Fastly, Inc. FSLY Cloud-delivered application platforms $4.2B 25.0x 12% 20% 32 Nutanix, Inc. NTNX Infrastructure platform and data-layer software $18.1B 21.4x 13% 25% 37 DigitalOcean Holdings, Inc. DOCN Infrastructure platform and data-layer software $15.5B 21.4x 54% 40% 94 Gloo Holdings, Inc. GLOO Cloud-delivered application platforms $423M 19.2x n/a 8% n/a CORE — 6.0x–19.1x · median 10.7x · 12 companies Elastic N.V. ESTC Cloud-delivered application platforms $8.8B 19.1x 15% 21% 36 Backblaze, Inc. BLZE Infrastructure platform and data-layer software $827M 14.1x 26% 27% 53 Microsoft Corporation MSFT Infrastructure platform and data-layer software $3741B 14.0x 19% 62% 81 Dell Technologies Inc. DELL Hyperscale and AI systems supply $368B 13.4x 23% 12% 35 International Business Machines Corporation IBM Cloud managed services and integration $280B 13.1x 4% 29% 33 Science Applications International Corporation SAIC Cloud managed services and integration $8.3B 11.0x 1% 10% 11 Akamai Technologies, Inc. AKAM Infrastructure platform and data-layer software $21.0B 10.5x 13% 40% 53 Nebius Group N.V. NBIS Cloud-delivered application platforms $61.9B 9.7x n/a 53% n/a Pegasystems Inc. PEGA Cloud-delivered application platforms $5.4B 9.5x 9% 28% 36

19. 19
    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (2 OF 2)

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

    The second half of the public comparables table on EV/EBITDA (CY2027E), grouped by valuation tier.

    This continues the comparables table from the previous page, on the same EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) basis and the same tier shading. Together the two pages cover all 24 rated companies in this set. We keep the presentation consistent across both pages so a reader can move between them without recalibrating.

    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 (10.7x); amber marks below · 24 rated companies; 10 not rated (no eligible EV/EBITDA) · tickers link to the underlying source · as of 2026-09-25 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-25; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All 24 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. Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services 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 — CONTINUED — 6.0x–19.1x · median 10.7x · 12 companies Insight Enterprises, Inc. NSIT Cloud managed services and integration $5.9B 8.8x 4% 7% 11 Oracle Corporation ORCL Infrastructure platform and data-layer software $543B 8.4x 42% 58% 99 WhiteFiber, Inc. Ordinary Shares WYFI Cloud managed services and integration $970M 6.3x n/a 51% 169 DISCOUNT — <6.0x · median 3.6x · 6 companies CoreWeave, Inc. Class A Common Stock CRWV Infrastructure platform and data-layer software $82.1B 5.2x n/a 59% 165 IREN Limited IREN Cloud managed services and integration $18.2B 4.9x n/a n/a n/a Grid Dynamics Holdings, Inc. GDYN Cloud managed services and integration $334M 4.8x 9% 15% 24 Kingsoft Cloud Holdings Limited KC Cloud-delivered application platforms $2.7B 2.4x 29% 45% 75 Tuya Inc. TUYA Infrastructure platform and data-layer software $111M 1.8x 12% 16% 27 Unisys Corporation UIS Cloud managed services and integration $573M 1.7x 1% 17% 18

20. 20
    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 1)

    All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First

    A list of the four precedent transactions with disclosed terms, ordered newest first, with multiples calculated on LTM financials at announcement.

    This page lists the four transactions in this tier with disclosed terms, newest first, with multiples calculated on LTM financials at the time each deal was announced. That basis differs from the CY2027E consensus basis used elsewhere in the report, so we don't draw a direct spread between the two. It's still the clearest record we have of what buyers have actually paid in this sector.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 1) All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 4 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (35 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-25 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-25; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 41 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate filings collapsed); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 31 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. Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 20 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters Sep-2025 ACR Ocean Resources LLC → ODP Corporation $1.6B n/a n/a ACR Ocean Resources LLC's announced acquisition of ODP Corporation is recorded at $1.6B in Sep-2025, with the deal value unit unresolved in the filing and no earnings or revenue multiple attached. Read it as evidence of appetite rather than as a price marker for the… Dec-2020 Despature Family → JD Cloud & AI business n/a n/a 13.1x The Dec-2020 acquisition of the JD Cloud & AI business by Despature Family is recorded at 13.1x EBITDA. That sits above the centre of the rated range in this public set and below the premium end — a working reference for a profitable cloud platform asset. Aug-2019 VMware, Inc. → Pivotal Software, Inc. n/a 3.4x n/a VMware, Inc.'s Aug-2019 acquisition of Pivotal Software, Inc. is recorded at 3.4x revenue. A systems and platform incumbent buying a developer-facing platform is the pattern this sector's buyer pools repeat: capability and developer distribution pulled onto an… May-2019 TimeFireVR Inc. → Red Cat Propware, Inc. n/a n/a 10.6x TimeFireVR Inc. completed its acquisition of Red Cat Propware, Inc. in May-2019 at 10.6x EBITDA. That level makes it a reference point at the small end of the record rather than evidence of a sector-wide price.

21. 21
    06 · REPORTED FIGURES AND THEIR FILINGS (1 OF 3)

    Every Reported Figure, Linked to the Filing It Was Taken From

    The first of three pages presenting every reported figure behind the report alongside its filing source.

    This page lays out the reported figures behind the report, each one tied back to the filing it came from, covering all 34 companies in the set. Estimates are consensus figures and don't carry a filing link, since they aren't drawn from a single disclosed document. Having every reported number traceable this way is what makes the earlier analysis checkable.

    Everything on this page

    06 · REPORTED FIGURES AND THEIR FILINGS (1 OF 3) Every Reported Figure, Linked to the Filing It Was Taken From 34 of 34 companies carry a filing source · latest reported year per figure · estimates are consensus and have no filing to link · as of 2026-09-25 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-25; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Each figure links to the company's own filing on SEC EDGAR, and the link carries a text fragment so the browser scrolls to the number inside the document. Figures shown are as reported (not estimates); a blank cell means the platform holds no filing-sourced value for that figure. Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 21 Company Revenue EBITDA Net income EPS (diluted) Year Form Akamai Technologies, Inc. (AKAM) $4,208M A $452M A 3.22A 2025 8-K Backblaze, Inc. (BLZE) $146M A $-26M A -0.23A 2025 8-K CoreWeave, Inc. Class A Common Stock (CRWV) $5,131M A $-1,167M A 2025 8-K CSP Inc. (CSPI) $59M A $0M A 0.01A 2025 8-K Dell Technologies Inc. (DELL) $113,538M A $5,936M A 1.68A 2026 10-K Digimarc Corp. (DMRC) $34M A $-12M A -0.56A 2025 8-K DigitalOcean Holdings, Inc. (DOCN) $901M A $259M A 0.28A 2025 8-K Elastic N.V. (ESTC) $1,739M A $368M A 1.19A 2026 8-K Fastly, Inc. (FSLY) $624M A $20M A -0.09A 2025 8-K Grid Dynamics Holdings, Inc. (GDYN) $412M A $35M A 0.51A 2025 8-K Gloo Holdings, Inc. (GLOO) $95M A $-157M A 2026 10-K Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company (HPE) $34,296M A $57M A 2.15A 2025 10-K

22. 22
    06 · REPORTED FIGURES AND THEIR FILINGS (2 OF 3)

    Every Reported Figure, Linked to the Filing It Was Taken From

    The second of three pages presenting every reported figure behind the report alongside its filing source.

    This page continues the same reported-figure detail, covering the same 34 companies and the same latest-reported-year basis. Each number here traces to the filing it was taken from, and estimates remain unlinked because they are consensus rather than filed figures. We keep this level of detail visible so nothing in the body rests on a number that can't be independently traced.

    Everything on this page

    06 · REPORTED FIGURES AND THEIR FILINGS (2 OF 3) Every Reported Figure, Linked to the Filing It Was Taken From 34 of 34 companies carry a filing source · latest reported year per figure · estimates are consensus and have no filing to link · as of 2026-09-25 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-25; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Each figure links to the company's own filing on SEC EDGAR, and the link carries a text fragment so the browser scrolls to the number inside the document. Figures shown are as reported (not estimates); a blank cell means the platform holds no filing-sourced value for that figure. Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 22 Company Revenue EBITDA Net income EPS (diluted) Year Form International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) $67,535M A $10,593M A 1.68A 2025 10-K IonQ, Inc. (IONQ) $130M A $-512M A 2025 8-K IonQ, Inc. WT (IONQ-WT) $130M A $-512M A -0.60A 2025 8-K IREN Limited (IREN) $185M A $-155M A 2025 8-K Kingsoft Cloud Holdings Limited (KC) $9,559M A $-936M A 2025 20-F MongoDB, Inc. (MDB) $2,464M A $431M A 3.33A 2026 8-K Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) $281,724M A $101,832M A 3.88A 2025 10-K Nebius Group N.V. (NBIS) $530M A $102M A 2025 6-K Cloudflare, Inc. (NET) $2,168M A $343M A 0.49A 2025 8-K Insight Enterprises, Inc. (NSIT) $8,247M A $157M A 2.06A 2025 10-K Nutanix, Inc. (NTNX) $655M A $188M A 2025 8-K Oracle Corporation (ORCL) $67,357M A $22,200M A 4.67A 2026 8-K

23. 23
    06 · REPORTED FIGURES AND THEIR FILINGS (3 OF 3)

    Every Reported Figure, Linked to the Filing It Was Taken From

    Every Reported Figure, Linked to the Filing It Was Taken From.

    Every Reported Figure, Linked to the Filing It Was Taken From 34 of 34 companies carry a filing source · latest reported year per figure · estimates are consensus and have no filing to link · as of 2026-09-25 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-25; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Each figure links to the company's own filing on SEC EDGAR, and the link carries a text fragment so the browser scrolls to the number inside the document. Figures shown are as reported (not estimates); a blank cell means the platform holds no filing-sourced value for that figure. 23

    Everything on this page

    06 · REPORTED FIGURES AND THEIR FILINGS (3 OF 3) Every Reported Figure, Linked to the Filing It Was Taken From 34 of 34 companies carry a filing source · latest reported year per figure · estimates are consensus and have no filing to link · as of 2026-09-25 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-25; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Each figure links to the company's own filing on SEC EDGAR, and the link carries a text fragment so the browser scrolls to the number inside the document. Figures shown are as reported (not estimates); a blank cell means the platform holds no filing-sourced value for that figure. Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 23 Company Revenue EBITDA Net income EPS (diluted) Year Form Pegasystems Inc. (PEGA) $1,746M A $385M A 1.50A 2025 8-K D-Wave Quantum Inc. (QBTS) $25M A $-85M A -0.39A 2025 8-K Rigetti Computing, Inc. (RGTI) $7M A $-216M A -0.16A 2025 8-K Rackspace Technology, Inc. (RXT) $2,686M A $-226M A -0.07A 2025 10-K Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) $7,262M A $358M A 7.88A 2026 8-K Tuya Inc. (TUYA) $322M A $58M A 0.03A 2025 6-K Twilio Inc. (TWLO) $5,067M A $34M A 2.39A 2025 8-K Unisys Corporation (UIS) $1,950M A $-340M A -0.05A 2025 8-K WhiteFiber, Inc. Ordinary Shares (WYFI) $79M A $-25M A 2025 10-K Xunlei Limited (XNET) $462M A $1,051M A 0.38A 2025 20-F

24. 24
    06 · METHODOLOGY

    Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality

    A methodology page explaining the report's sources, assumptions and data-quality treatment.

    This page sets out how the report was built — the valuation basis, what was excluded and why, and where every underlying disclosure lives. Every figure in the report links back to the record it was taken from, and where no link exists, the appendix names the source and the basis on which it was read. That transparency is what makes the earlier pages usable for real diligence, not just a summary view.

    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 2026-09-25 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. Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice 24 VALUATION BASIS Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (24 of 34 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 24%, 24 of 34 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 Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services and it clears the coverage gate with 25 of 34 companies (74%). EV / Revenue, P / E are carried as a cross-check. The set earns: 25 of the 27 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 59 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 1510 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 (1509) · home.treasury.gov (1). The companion workbook beside this deck carries the complete source index.

25. 25

    Across This Set, the Higher Multiples Sit Alongside Faster Growth and Platform Control.

    Closing page restating that higher multiples in this set sit alongside faster growth and platform control.

    Across this set, the higher multiples sit alongside faster growth and platform control — that's the pattern this report is built to show. The companion tables carry the full universe, the exclusion ledger and the complete source index for any figure worth tracing further.

    Everything on this page

    Across This Set, the Higher Multiples Sit Alongside Faster Growth and Platform Control. NeuraCap AI — Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 25

More coverage in Information Technology

• Bi-Weekly Update · Sep 25, 2026Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Bi-Weekly Industry Events & M&A Update — September 11–25, 2026
• Sector Report · Sep 25, 2026Human Capital Management Software Sector Outlook — September 2026
• Bi-Weekly Update · Sep 25, 2026Insurance Software Bi-Weekly Industry Events & M&A Update — September 11–25, 2026
• Bi-Weekly Update · Sep 25, 2026Human Capital Management Software Bi-Weekly Industry Events & M&A Update — September 11–25, 2026