NEURACAP
Sector ReportSep 15, 2026 · 23 pages · Free to read

Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Sector Outlook — September 2026

A tier-based valuation map of the Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services sector: 35 companies across five segments, priced on EV/Revenue (CY2027E) and benchmarked against a 25-transaction deal tape. Built for owners, operators and acquirers deciding their next move in this sector.

Download PDFDownload PowerPoint

Key figures

3.8x
Sector median valuation
EV/Revenue (CY2027E), 24 of 35 rated
16.3x
Premium quartile
Top tier EV/Revenue (CY2027E)
0.6x
Discount quartile
Bottom tier EV/Revenue (CY2027E)
4.2x
Faster-growth premium
vs 1.7x for slower growers (13% growth split)

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 › CLOUD INFRASTRUCTURE AND PLATFORM SERVICES

Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services: Where the Value Sits

A data-led view of the Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services universe — who plays, how the market prices them, what has transacted, and what it means for owners and acquirers.

September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential

Market data as of 2026-09-15 · primary valuation basis EV / Revenue (CY2027E)

Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential

1

1 / 23

Executive summary

Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services trades at a 3.8x EV/Revenue (CY2027E) median, but the spread around it is the real story: a 16.3x premium quartile against a 0.6x discount quartile. Growth is the clearest separator: names growing at 13% or faster command 4.2x versus 1.7x for slower growers, an association rather than a proven cause. A 25-transaction deal tape gives the tier structure a usable reference point alongside the public market. Where a company sits in this structure, not the sector label, sets the agenda for owners, operators and acquirers.

Key findings

  • The sector splits into a premium tier and a discount tier around one median multiple.
  • Growth, not the sector label, separates the top-priced names from the rest.
  • 25 recorded transactions give this tier an active reference set to price against.
  • Where a company sits in the tier structure sets its next strategic question.

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 slide introducing the Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services sector outlook as of September 15, 2026.

    We open with the sector's headline finding: valuation in Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services runs by tier, not by label. Everything that follows in this report builds toward that one conclusion.

    Everything on this page

    INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY › SOFTWARE AND SERVICES › CLOUD INFRASTRUCTURE AND PLATFORM SERVICES Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services: Where the Value Sits A data-led view of the Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services universe — who plays, how the market prices them, what has transacted, and what it means for owners and acquirers. September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Market data as of 2026-09-15 · primary valuation basis EV / Revenue (CY2027E) Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential Sources & methodology 1

  2. 02
    CONTENTS

    What This Report Covers

    Contents page listing the report's five sections plus appendix.

    We lay out the five sections ahead — the bottom line, the landscape, valuation and situations, the deal tape, and strategic implications — plus a full appendix. Section one carries the entire conclusion, so a reader pressed for time can stop there and still leave informed.

    Everything on this page

    CONTENTS What This Report Covers 01 The Bottom Line What the Data Says, up Front 02 The Landscape Who Plays in Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services — and What Each Part of the Market Is Worth 03 Valuation & Situations How the Market Prices the Sector on EV / Revenue 04 The Deal Tape What Has Actually Transacted 05 Strategic Implications The Agenda from Here 06 Appendix Comparables Detail, Methodology, Sources and Assumptions Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential Sources & methodology 2

  3. 03
    01 · THE BOTTOM LINE

    Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Is Priced in Tiers — and Tier Membership, Not the Sector Label, Sets the Conversation

    Summarizes the report's central finding that valuation tiers, not the sector label, drive the conversation.

    The sector clears at a 3.8x EV/Revenue median, but that number hides a wide spread — a 16.3x premium quartile against a 0.6x discount quartile. Growth is the clearest line we see between the tiers: names growing at 13% or faster command 4.2x versus 1.7x for the rest. A 25-transaction deal tape gives us a second reference point alongside the public market. The result: tier membership, not the sector label, is what should set the valuation conversation.

    Everything on this page

    01 · THE BOTTOM LINE Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Is Priced in Tiers — and Tier Membership, Not the Sector Label, Sets the Conversation The full story on one page · figures on EV / Revenue (CY2027E), market data as of 2026-09-15 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-15; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / Revenue on CY2027E consensus (24 of 35 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Practitioners price this industry on EV / Revenue rather than EV / EBITDA; validated coverage supports the industry standard (24 of 35 companies), so this report follows it. Qualitative characterisations are NeuraCap views. Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential Sources & methodology 3 1 The Sector Clears at 3.8x EV/Revenue, with a Wide Spread Around It 24 of 35 approved companies carry an eligible EV / Revenue on CY2027E consensus; the top quartile holds 16.3x against 0.6x for the bottom. 2 Faster Growers Carry the Higher Multiple; Slower Growers Trade at a Discount Rated names growing at 13% or faster command 4.2x, against 1.7x for the rest — the growth story, not the sector label, sets the price. 3 The Deal Tape Is Active Enough to Price Against 25 recorded transactions give the tier a usable reference set, newest first in section 04. 4 Where a Company Sits Determines the Agenda The situation map in the closing sections translates the set's own break-points into the questions an owner, operator or acquirer should resolve next. 3.8x Sector median EV/Revenue CY2027E consensus · 24 rated of 35 companies 16.3x Premium tier median vs 0.6x discount top quartile (n=6) against bottom quartile (n=6) — the spread the report explains 25 Recorded transactions in this tier told as case studies in the deal section; the full tape is in the appendix

  4. 04
    SECTION 02

    02

    Section divider introducing the market map of who competes in this sector.

    We turn now to the market map: who plays in Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services, and what each part of it is worth.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 02 02 THE LANDSCAPE Who Plays in Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services — and What Each Part of the Market Is Worth 02 of 06 Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential Sources & methodology 4

  5. 05
    02 · MARKET MAP

    The 35-company Universe Groups into 5 Segments — Scale and Pricing Differ Across Them

    Shows the 35-company universe grouped into five segments with median EV/Revenue by group.

    We group the 35-company universe into five segments and show where each one prices on a median EV/Revenue (CY2027E) basis. Scale and pricing differ sharply across these segments, even though they share one sector label. That gap is exactly why segment context matters before any single multiple is applied to a name. So the map is the starting point for every valuation conversation that follows.

    Everything on this page

    02 · MARKET MAP The 35-company Universe Groups into 5 Segments — Scale and Pricing Differ Across Them 35 approved companies grouped by business segment · median EV / Revenue (CY2027E) per group · as of 2026-09-15 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-15; 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 Sources & methodology 5 CLOUD DATABASE AND INFRASTRUCTURE PLATFORM SOFTWARE 13 cos median 4.5x ORCL NET CRWV TWLO MDB AKAM NTNX RXT BLZE TUYA DOCN MSFT XNET CLOUD MIGRATION AND MANAGED CLOUD SERVICES 8 cos median 0.9x IBM SAIC NSIT UIS CSPI GDYN IREN WYFI CLOUD-DELIVERED APPLICATION PLATFORMS 7 cos median 3.8x NBIS ESTC FSLY KC GLOO DMRC PEGA CLOUD INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS AND SERVER PLATFORMS 6 cos median 12.7x DELL HPE IONQ IONQ-WT QBTS RGTI ADJACENT: DIGITAL ASSET LENDING AND CREDIT 1 cos no rated names ANTA

  6. 06
    02 · LANDSCAPE

    One Sector Label, 5 Different Businesses

    Explains what each of the five segments does and why it matters commercially.

    One sector label covers five genuinely different businesses, and we walk through what each one does. Full company-level detail sits in the appendix for anyone who wants to trace a specific name. Segment identity is often a better guide to pricing than the sector tag alone. So we recommend reading valuation multiples segment-by-segment, not sector-wide.

    Everything on this page

    02 · LANDSCAPE One Sector Label, 5 Different Businesses Segment view of the approved universe · EV / Revenue (CY2027E) medians on rated names · as of 2026-09-15 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-15; 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 Sources & methodology 6 Segment n Share of universe Median EV/Revenue Names to know What they do — and why it matters Cloud database and infrastructure platform software 13 37% 4.5x ORCL · Cloudflare, Inc. (NET) · +11 more 13 names. Led by ORCL, Cloudflare, Inc. (NET). Cloud migration and managed cloud services 8 23% 0.9x IBM · Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) · +6 more 8 names. Led by IBM, Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). Cloud-delivered application platforms 7 20% 3.8x NBIS · Elastic N.V. (ESTC) · +5 more 7 names. Led by NBIS, Elastic N.V. (ESTC). Cloud infrastructure systems and server platforms 6 17% 12.7x Dell Technologies Inc. (DELL) · HPE · +4 more 6 names. Led by Dell Technologies Inc. (DELL), HPE. Adjacent: digital asset lending and credit 1 3% — Antalpha Platform Holding Company (ANTA) 1 names. Led by Antalpha Platform Holding Company (ANTA).

  7. 07
    SECTION 03

    03

    Section divider introducing how the public market prices the sector.

    Next we show how the market actually prices this sector on EV/Revenue.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 03 03 VALUATION & SITUATIONS How the Market Prices the Sector on EV / Revenue 03 of 06 Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential Sources & methodology 7

  8. 08
    03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION

    The Sector Clears at 3.8x EV/Revenue — the Range Around That Median Is the Story

    Ranks all 24 rated companies by EV/Revenue and shows the 3.8x sector median with tier bands.

    The sector clears at a 3.8x EV/Revenue median across the 24 rated companies, but the range around that median is the real story we want clients to sit with. Tier zones split the rated set into quartiles, from a 16.3x premium band to a 0.6x discount band. That spread means the sector median alone is a poor guide to what any single name should trade at. So the question for any owner or acquirer is which tier a name actually sits in, not what the sector average says.

    Everything on this page

    03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION The Sector Clears at 3.8x EV/Revenue — the Range Around That Median Is the Story EV / Revenue (CY2027E) · all 24 rated companies, sorted descending · sector median 3.8x · as of 2026-09-15 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-15; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / Revenue on CY2027E consensus (24 of 35 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Practitioners price this industry on EV / Revenue rather than EV / EBITDA; validated coverage supports the industry standard (24 of 35 companies), so this report follows it. 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 / Revenue (CY2027E) basis. Panel commentary is a NeuraCap view. Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential Sources & methodology 8 PREMIUM · median 16.3x CORE · median 3.8x DISCOUNT · median 0.6x Sector median 3.8x WHAT SEPARATES THE TWO ENDS The top of the range. Premium-tier names — IONQ, Cloudflare, Inc. (NET), IONQ-WT — hold a median 16.3x. The bottom of the range. Discount-tier names — Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), GLOO, NSIT — trade at a median 0.6x. Why it matters. Which end a company is benchmarked against frames every valuation conversation that follows.

  9. 09
    03 · VALUATION DRIVERS

    What the Market Rewards

    Compares median EV/Revenue between faster-growing and slower-growing cohorts, split at 13% growth.

    We split the rated set at the covered median growth rate of 13% and compare the two halves. Faster growers command a 4.2x median EV/Revenue against 1.7x for the slower half. That gap is an association we observe in the data, not a proven cause of the multiple. So growth is the clearest lever we can point to for any name looking to close a valuation gap.

    Everything on this page

    03 · VALUATION DRIVERS What the Market Rewards Median EV / Revenue (CY2027E) by revenue-growth cohort (split at the covered median, 13%) · rated names with growth estimates · as of 2026-09-15 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-15; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Cohort medians on rated names with the required estimates (faster n=11; slower n=11). Driver readings are NeuraCap views on the supplied data — association, not causation. Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential Sources & methodology 9 EV/Revenue, median per cohort Growth the Market Believes In Names growing at or above 13% carry 4.2x against 1.7x below it. Margin Quality Profitability differences compound the growth split rather than replacing it. Business Mix Segment medians differ across Cloud database and infrastructure platform software, Cloud migration and managed cloud services — mix, not the sector label, sets the multiple.

  10. 10
    03 · SITUATION MAP

    Four Situations, Four Different Agendas

    Maps rated companies into four situations cut on valuation versus the sector median and growth versus the covered median.

    We cut the rated set on EV/Revenue against the 3.8x sector median and on growth against the 13% covered median, producing four situations. These are observations about where each name sits today, not recommendations to buy or sell anything. Each quadrant carries a distinct question for its owner. So the map is the bridge between the data and the agenda we set out next.

    Everything on this page

    03 · SITUATION MAP Four Situations, Four Different Agendas Cut on EV / Revenue vs the sector median (3.8x) (rows) and revenue growth vs the covered median (13%) (columns) · 2 rated names without the second measure are not mapped · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-15; 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 Sources & methodology 10 Credited and Delivering Above-median multiple · above-median revenue growth 7 names ORCL · Cloudflare, Inc. (NET) · MongoDB, Inc. (MDB) · +4 more The multiple already assumes execution; the agenda is defending what the market has credited. Premium Ahead of the Operating Case Above-median multiple · below-median revenue growth 4 names IBM · Twilio Inc. (TWLO) · NTNX · +1 more The premium outruns the operating measure beneath it; the gap wants an answer before the market asks the question. Operating Case Ahead of the Price Below-median multiple · above-median revenue growth 4 names Dell Technologies Inc. (DELL) · KC · BLZE · +1 more The operating case runs ahead of the price — the re-rating conversation lives in this cell. Priced for What It Is Below-median multiple · below-median revenue growth 7 names HPE · Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) · NSIT · +4 more Priced as what it is today; ownership, structure and capital-allocation questions dominate.

  11. 11
    03 · GROWTH VS PROFITABILITY

    Growth and Profitability, Mapped Against What the Market Pays

    Plots the 17 companies with both estimates on growth against EBITDA margin, cut at the covered medians.

    We plot growth against EBITDA margin for the companies with both estimates, cutting at the covered medians of 13% growth and 21% margin. Each quadrant carries its own median EV/Revenue, showing that growth and profitability price differently depending on which one a company delivers. This is a read of the data as supplied, not a claim about what causes the multiple. So the quadrant a name falls into is a fair starting point for how the market is likely to view it.

    Everything on this page

    03 · GROWTH VS PROFITABILITY Growth and Profitability, Mapped Against What the Market Pays Revenue growth (CY2027E, x-axis) vs EBITDA margin (CY2027E, y-axis) · 17 companies with both estimates · cuts at the covered medians (13% growth, 21% margin) · median EV/Revenue per quadrant · as of 2026-09-15 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-15; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Quadrant cuts are the covered set's medians. Quadrant medians on names with a meaningful EV/Revenue (balanced n=6; margin-only n=3; growth-only n=3; neither n=5). Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential Sources & methodology 11 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 20% 40% BALANCED median 4.5x MARGIN ONLY median 5.8x GROWTH ONLY median 0.7x NEITHER median 0.7x UIS IBM TUYA TWLO FSLY NTNX AKAM ESTC MDB DELL BLZE NET KC x: revenue growth (CY2027E) · y: EBITDA margin (CY2027E) HOW TO READ THIS Each dot is a rated company. The crosshairs are the covered medians; the corner figures are the median multiple of each quadrant.

  12. 12
    03 · THE AGENDA

    The Moves Each Situation Supports

    Sets out the strategic questions each situation from the map should prompt for an owner or acquirer.

    For each situation identified on the map, we frame the question an owner or acquirer should be resolving next. These are directional views grounded in the cohort data, not investment recommendations. The right move depends heavily on which tier and which growth cohort a name sits in. So this page turns the data into an agenda, not just a picture.

    Everything on this page

    03 · THE AGENDA The Moves Each Situation Supports 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 2026-09-15; 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 Sources & methodology 12 Defend and Extend Premium names protect the franchise the multiple already prices. What changes the answer: Two quarters of decelerating growth. Prove the Re-Rating Discounted growers close the gap with evidence, not narrative. What changes the answer: Growth sustained above the covered median. Fix the Economics Below-median margins are the controllable lever. What changes the answer: Margin trajectory crossing the cohort median. Test the Market Where public credit is absent, the deal tape is the second opinion. What changes the answer: A comparable transaction printing above the public median.

  13. 13
    SECTION 04

    04

    Section divider introducing the deal tape of transactions that have actually happened.

    We now turn to what has actually transacted in this sector.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 04 04 THE DEAL TAPE What Has Actually Transacted 04 of 06 Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential Sources & methodology 13

  14. 14
    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES

    The Deals That Set the Market's Reference Points

    Walks through three case studies drawn from the 25-transaction deal tape.

    We walk through three transactions from the tape as case studies, with multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed. These deal multiples sit on a different basis than the CY2027E public multiples, so we don't claim a spread between them. The full tape of transactions is available in the appendix for anyone who wants the complete record. So these case studies are reference points for how real buyers have valued real assets in this sector.

    Everything on this page

    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES The Deals That Set the Market's Reference Points 3 of 25 recorded transactions, told as case studies · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · the complete tape is in the appendix · as of 2026-09-15 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-15; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 38 tape record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; parent financials detached); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 24 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the tape 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 Sources & methodology 14 May-2026 $32.5B Undisclosed buyer Undisclosed buyer acquires Cloud and Power Infrastructure EV / LTM revenue 1.1x EV / LTM EBITDA 14.9x WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED Undisclosed buyer moved for Cloud and Power Infrastructure in May-2026; the tape records it as announced. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED The filing records $32.5B of enterprise value, struck at 14.9x LTM EBITDA, the benchmark buyers in this segment start from. May-2025 $2.5B Undisclosed buyer Undisclosed buyer acquires Applied Digital Corporation EV / LTM revenue 12.0x EV / LTM EBITDA 43.0x WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED Undisclosed buyer moved for Applied Digital Corporation in May-2025; the tape records it as announced. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED The filing records $2.5B of enterprise value, struck at 43.0x LTM EBITDA, the benchmark buyers in this segment start from. Aug-2019 $2.7B VMware, Inc. 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 tape records it as announced. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED The filing records $2.7B of enterprise value, struck at 3.4x LTM revenue, the benchmark buyers in this segment start from.

  15. 15
    SECTION 05

    05

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

    From here we turn the data into an agenda for owners, operators and acquirers.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 05 05 STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS The Agenda from Here 05 of 06 Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential Sources & methodology 15

  16. 16
    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS

    What This Means for Owners, Operators and Acquirers

    Sets out what the tier structure and deal tape mean for owners, operators and acquirers over the next twelve months.

    We translate the tier structure and the deal tape into the questions each audience should be asking over the next twelve months. Owners need to know which tier prices their business; operators need to know which lever the market is actually paying for; acquirers need to reconcile the public tiers against the deal tape. These are directional views, not recommendations. So the report closes by putting a specific question in front of each audience, not a generic conclusion.

    Everything on this page

    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS What This Means for Owners, Operators and Acquirers 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 2026-09-15; 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 Sources & methodology 16 FOR OWNERS Know Which Tier You Are Priced In The tier, not the sector, frames the valuation conversation. The appendix shows exactly where each name sits. FOR OPERATORS Move the Lever the Market Pays For The drivers page shows which operating metric separates the tiers in this sector. FOR ACQUIRERS Price Against the Right Reference Public tiers and the deal tape give different answers; the gap between them is the negotiation.

  17. 17
    SECTION 06

    06

    Section divider introducing the full comparable universe, methodology and sources.

    The closing section carries the full universe, the methodology and every underlying source.

    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 Sources & methodology 17

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

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

    Lists rated companies' EV/Revenue with tier shading, first of two pages.

    We list every rated company's EV/Revenue (CY2027E) here, shaded by whether it sits above or below the 3.8x sector median. The complete field set for all 24 rated companies sits in the companion workbook alongside this appendix. Names without an eligible multiple are also listed there. So a client can trace any figure in this report back to the specific company behind it.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 2) Public Comparables on EV / Revenue (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier Teal shading marks a EV/Revenue above the sector median (3.8x); amber marks below · 24 rated companies; 11 not rated (no eligible EV/Revenue) · tickers link to the underlying source · as of 2026-09-15 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-15; 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 Sources & methodology 18 Company Ticker Segment EV EV/Revenue (CY2027E) Rev growth EBITDA margin Rule of 40 PREMIUM — ≥5.0x · median 16.3x · 6 companies IONQ IONQ Cloud infrastructure systems and server platforms $13.3B 34.3x 34% n/a n/a Cloudflare, Inc. NET Cloud database and infrastructure platform software $118B 31.9x 28% 25% 54 IONQ-WT IONQ-WT Cloud infrastructure systems and server platforms $9.0B 23.6x 43% n/a n/a MongoDB, Inc. MDB Cloud database and infrastructure platform software $31.6B 9.0x 18% 23% 41 NTNX NTNX Cloud database and infrastructure platform software $20.9B 6.2x 13% 25% 37 Twilio Inc. TWLO Cloud database and infrastructure platform software $38.7B 5.8x 12% 22% 34 CORE — 1.4x–5.0x · median 3.8x · 12 companies ORCL ORCL Cloud database and infrastructure platform software $533B 4.8x 41% 55% 96 Fastly, Inc. FSLY Cloud-delivered application platforms $3.9B 4.7x 12% 20% 32 NBIS NBIS Cloud-delivered application platforms $53.7B 4.5x n/a 54% n/a Akamai Technologies, Inc. AKAM Cloud database and infrastructure platform software $21.1B 4.2x 13% 40% 53 Elastic N.V. ESTC Cloud-delivered application platforms $8.9B 4.0x 15% 21% 36 IBM IBM Cloud migration and managed cloud services $290B 4.0x 4% 29% 33 DMRC DMRC Cloud-delivered application platforms $106M 3.6x 6% n/a n/a BLZE BLZE Cloud database and infrastructure platform software $783M 3.6x 26% 28% 54 CRWV CRWV Cloud database and infrastructure platform software $46.5B 1.8x n/a 59% 165

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

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

    Continues the rated-company EV/Revenue listing with tier shading, second of two pages.

    This page completes the comparable set, again shaded against the 3.8x sector median. Together the two pages cover all 24 rated companies in the universe. The companion workbook carries the same data with the complete field set. So nothing in the valuation pages of this report rests on a company a client can't look up.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (2 OF 2) Public Comparables on EV / Revenue (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier Teal shading marks a EV/Revenue above the sector median (3.8x); amber marks below · 24 rated companies; 11 not rated (no eligible EV/Revenue) · tickers link to the underlying source · as of 2026-09-15 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-15; 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 Sources & methodology 19 Company Ticker Segment EV EV/Revenue (CY2027E) Rev growth EBITDA margin Rule of 40 CORE — CONTINUED — 1.4x–5.0x · median 3.8x · 12 companies HPE HPE Cloud infrastructure systems and server platforms $92.3B 1.7x 11% n/a n/a Dell Technologies Inc. DELL Cloud infrastructure systems and server platforms $384B 1.7x 24% 11% 35 Rackspace Technology, Inc. RXT Cloud database and infrastructure platform software $4.0B 1.5x 5% n/a n/a DISCOUNT — <1.4x · median 0.6x · 6 companies Science Applications International Corporation SAIC Cloud migration and managed cloud services $8.6B 1.2x 1% 10% 11 GLOO GLOO Cloud-delivered application platforms $202M 0.7x 51% 8% 59 NSIT NSIT Cloud migration and managed cloud services $6.2B 0.7x 4% 7% 11 TUYA TUYA Cloud database and infrastructure platform software $204M 0.5x 12% 16% 27 UIS UIS Cloud migration and managed cloud services $565M 0.3x 1% 17% 18 KC KC Cloud-delivered application platforms $3.2B 0.2x 29% 7% 36

  20. 20
    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 2)

    The Full Deal Tape, Newest First

    Lists the deal tape newest first, first of two pages, with multiples where disclosed.

    We list the transaction tape newest first, with LTM multiples at announcement where they were disclosed. Some records carry data-quality flags and are shown as recorded in the filing rather than adjusted. Transactions without a disclosed value or multiple are held in the companion workbook rather than shown here. So every deal on this page is one a client can trace back to its filing.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 2) The Full Deal Tape, Newest First 25 recorded transactions in this tier · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-15 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-15; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 38 tape record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; parent financials detached); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 24 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the tape and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. 18 of 25 transactions shown; the rest are in the companion workbook. Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential Sources & methodology 20 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters May-2026 Undisclosed buyer → Cloud and Power Infrastructure $32.5B 1.1x 14.9x Undisclosed buyer paid $32.5B at 1.1x LTM revenue. Apr-2026 XMax AI Inc. → SuperX AI Technology USA $5M n/a n/a XMax AI Inc. paid $5M. Jan-2026 CompoSecure, Inc. → Husky Technologies Limited $689M n/a n/a CompoSecure, Inc. paid $689M. Dec-2025 New Era Energy & Digital, Inc. → Texas Critical Data Centers LLC $350M n/a n/a New Era Energy & Digital, Inc. paid $350M. Nov-2025 ACR Ocean Resources LLC → ODP Corporation $1.0B n/a n/a ACR Ocean Resources LLC paid $1.0B. Oct-2025 Vodafone Group Plc → Skaylink GmbH $206M n/a n/a Vodafone Group Plc paid $206M. Aug-2025 Marathon Digital Holdings, Inc. → Exaion $262M n/a n/a Marathon Digital Holdings, Inc. paid $262M. May-2025 Undisclosed buyer → Applied Digital Corporation $2.5B 12.0x 43.0x Undisclosed buyer paid $2.5B at 12.0x LTM revenue. Sep-2024 CACI International Inc. → Azure Summit Technology, Inc. $1.3B n/a n/a CACI International Inc. paid $1.3B.

  21. 21
    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (2 OF 2)

    The Full Deal Tape, Newest First

    Continues the deal tape newest first, second of two pages.

    This page completes the transaction tape shown in the appendix. The same data-quality caveats apply: flagged records are shown as recorded, and undisclosed transactions sit in the companion workbook. Deal multiples remain on an LTM-at-announcement basis, not directly comparable to the public CY2027E multiples shown earlier. So the tape here is a reference set, not a like-for-like comparison to the public market.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (2 OF 2) The Full Deal Tape, Newest First 25 recorded transactions in this tier · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-15 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-15; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 38 tape record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; parent financials detached); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 24 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the tape and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. 18 of 25 transactions shown; the rest are in the companion workbook. Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential Sources & methodology 21 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters Jul-2024 Telefônica Brasil S.A. → IPNET Serviços em Nuvem e Desenvolvimento de Sistemas Ltda. and IPNET USA, LLC $42M n/a n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved, status defaulted announced. Jul-2023 DigitalOcean Holdings, Inc. → Paperspace $111M n/a n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Jun-2023 BCPE Chivalry Bidco Limited → Chindata Group Holdings Limited $58M n/a n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved, parent financials detached. Feb-2023 Ultia Teknoloji Yazılım ve Uygulama Geliştirme Ticaret A.Ş. → Ultia Platform IP $2M n/a n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved, status defaulted announced. Feb-2022 Akamai Technologies, Inc. → Linode $900M n/a n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved, status defaulted announced. Aug-2021 Telefónica Cybersecurity & Cloud Tech, S.L. → Telefônica Cloud e Tecnologia do Brasil S.A. $21M n/a n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved, status defaulted announced. Jan-2021 F5 Networks, Inc. → Volterra, Inc. $500M n/a n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved, status defaulted announced. Sep-2020 Pure Storage, Inc. → Portworx Inc. $370M n/a n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved, status defaulted announced. Jan-2020 Equinix, Inc. → Packet Host, Inc. $335M n/a n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved, status defaulted announced.

  22. 22
    06 · METHODOLOGY

    Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality

    Explains the sources, assumptions and data-quality treatment behind every figure in the report.

    This page sets out the sources behind every figure in the report, the assumptions we applied, and how data-quality issues were handled. We flag where multiples were excluded for failing plausibility checks, and where transaction records carry unresolved data-quality issues. Every figure quoted in this report traces back to a filing, a consensus estimate, or a market price a client can open themselves. So this page is the audit trail behind everything shown earlier.

    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 2026-09-15 Typeface note: NeuraCap brand face is Kallisto Medium; this build renders in a standard sans (Arial) and should be reviewed in the brand face before external distribution. Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential 22 VALUATION BASIS Primary valuation basis: EV / Revenue on CY2027E consensus (24 of 35 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Practitioners price this industry on EV / Revenue rather than EV / EBITDA; validated coverage supports the industry standard (24 of 35 companies), so this report follows it. 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 26 of 35 companies (74%). EV / Revenue, P / E are carried as a cross-check. DATA QUALITY & EXCLUSIONS 64 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 1572 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 (1571) · home.treasury.gov (1). The companion workbook beside this deck carries the complete source index.

  23. 23
    The Data Has a View. The Next Step Is a Conversation.

    NeuraCap AI — Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage

    Closing page pointing to the companion tables and inviting a follow-up conversation.

    The data has a view, and the companion tables carry the full universe, exclusion ledger and source index behind it. We're ready to walk through any figure in this report and turn it into the next conversation.

    Everything on this page

    The Data Has a View. The Next Step Is a Conversation. NeuraCap AI — Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential Sources & methodology 23

Sources and methodology

This report covers Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services (Information Technology › Software and Services › Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services) with market data and consensus estimates as of September 15, 2026. The company universe is the 35 listed companies whose core business is Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services 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: Akamai Technologies, Inc. (AKAM), Antalpha Platform Holding Company (ANTA), BLZE, CRWV, CSP Inc. (CSPI), Dell Technologies Inc. (DELL), DMRC, DOCN, Elastic N.V. (ESTC), Fastly, Inc. (FSLY), Grid Dynamics Holdings, Inc. (GDYN), GLOO, HPE, IBM, IONQ, IONQ-WT, IREN Limited (IREN), KC, MongoDB, Inc. (MDB), MSFT, NBIS, Cloudflare, Inc. (NET), NSIT, NTNX, ORCL, PEGA, D-Wave Quantum Inc. (QBTS), RGTI, Rackspace Technology, Inc. (RXT), Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), TUYA, Twilio Inc. (TWLO), UIS, WYFI, Xunlei Limited (XNET). The market map groups them by business vertical — Cloud database and infrastructure platform software: 13 companies (ORCL, NET, CRWV, TWLO, MDB, AKAM, NTNX, RXT, BLZE, TUYA, DOCN, MSFT, XNET); Cloud migration and managed cloud services: 8 companies (IBM, SAIC, NSIT, UIS, CSPI, GDYN, IREN, WYFI); Cloud-delivered application platforms: 7 companies (NBIS, ESTC, FSLY, KC, GLOO, DMRC, PEGA); Cloud infrastructure systems and server platforms: 6 companies (DELL, HPE, IONQ, IONQ-WT, QBTS, RGTI); Adjacent: digital asset lending and credit: 1 company (ANTA). 24 of the 35 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 Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services (Information Technology › Software and Services › Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services) with market data and consensus estimates as of September 15, 2026. The company universe is the 35 listed companies whose core business is Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services 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: Akamai Technologies, Inc. (AKAM), Antalpha Platform Holding Company (ANTA), BLZE, CRWV, CSP Inc. (CSPI), Dell Technologies Inc. (DELL), DMRC, DOCN, Elastic N.V. (ESTC), Fastly, Inc. (FSLY), Grid Dynamics Holdings, Inc. (GDYN), GLOO, HPE, IBM, IONQ, IONQ-WT, IREN Limited (IREN), KC, MongoDB, Inc. (MDB), MSFT, NBIS, Cloudflare, Inc. (NET), NSIT, NTNX, ORCL, PEGA, D-Wave Quantum Inc. (QBTS), RGTI, Rackspace Technology, Inc. (RXT), Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), TUYA, Twilio Inc. (TWLO), UIS, WYFI, Xunlei Limited (XNET). The market map groups them by business vertical — Cloud database and infrastructure platform software: 13 companies (ORCL, NET, CRWV, TWLO, MDB, AKAM, NTNX, RXT, BLZE, TUYA, DOCN, MSFT, XNET); Cloud migration and managed cloud services: 8 companies (IBM, SAIC, NSIT, UIS, CSPI, GDYN, IREN, WYFI); Cloud-delivered application platforms: 7 companies (NBIS, ESTC, FSLY, KC, GLOO, DMRC, PEGA); Cloud infrastructure systems and server platforms: 6 companies (DELL, HPE, IONQ, IONQ-WT, QBTS, RGTI); Adjacent: digital asset lending and credit: 1 company (ANTA). 24 of the 35 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

64 records failed a validation gate and never feed a statistic in this report (57 excluded from aggregate; 7 quarantined). Each exclusion, with its reason: ANTA — EBITDA is non-positive; EV/EBITDA is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · ANTA — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · BLZE — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · CRWV — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · CRWV — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · CRWV — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · CRWV — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · CSPI — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · DMRC — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · DMRC — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · DMRC — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · DMRC — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · ESTC — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · FSLY — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · GLOO — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · GLOO — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · GLOO — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · GLOO — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · HPE — Non-positive EPS; P/E is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · IONQ — EBITDA is non-positive; EV/EBITDA is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · IONQ — Implied EBITDA margin -143.6% outside the plausible band [-100%, 80%] (effect: quarantined) · IONQ — EBITDA is non-positive; EV/EBITDA is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · IONQ — Implied EBITDA margin -128.9% outside the plausible band [-100%, 80%] (effect: quarantined) · IONQ — EBITDA is non-positive; EV/EBITDA is n/m (effect: excluded from aggregate) · IONQ — 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 / Revenue on CY2027E consensus (24 of 35 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Practitioners price this industry on EV / Revenue rather than EV / EBITDA; validated coverage supports the industry standard (24 of 35 companies), so this report follows it. 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 26 of 35 companies (74%). EV / Revenue, P / E are carried as a cross-check. 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: 26 of 35 companies; EV / rEVenue: 32 of 35 companies; P/E: 23 of 35 companies. 2 companies show a non-meaningful EV / EBITDA denominator and are excluded from that statistic. 8 companies show a non-meaningful P / E denominator and are excluded from that statistic.

How the multiples and statistics are computed

Enterprise value (EV) is market capitalisation at the as-of date plus total debt minus cash and equivalents from the latest reported balance sheet, reconciled against the platform's stored value and disclosed where the two differ. Forward multiples divide EV (or the share price for P/E) by the consensus estimate for the stated calendar period; trailing multiples use the last twelve months of reported figures from SEC filings. A multiple with a negative or immaterial denominator is treated as not meaningful and excluded from every statistic. Cohort statistics are medians and quartiles over the rated set only; a group median with fewer than three observations is shown as the single company's figure and labelled as such. Valuation tiers cut the rated set at its quartiles (tiers cut at the rated set's quartiles: Premium ≥5.0x, Core 1.4x–5.0x, Discount <1.4x — 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: 3.8x = median(ev_revenue CY2027E) (24 rated companies) · 16.3x = median(ev_revenue CY2027E) within Premium tier (n=6) · 3.8x = median(ev_revenue CY2027E) within Core tier (n=12) · 0.6x = median(ev_revenue CY2027E) within Discount tier (n=6) · 4.2x = median(ev_revenue CY2027E) | growth ≥ 13% (n=11) · 1.7x = median(ev_revenue CY2027E) | growth < 13% (n=11) · 4.5x = median(ev_revenue CY2027E) within balanced quadrant (n=6) · 5.8x = median(ev_revenue CY2027E) within marginOnly quadrant (n=3) · 0.7x = median(ev_revenue CY2027E) within growthOnly quadrant (n=3) · 0.7x = median(ev_revenue CY2027E) within neither quadrant (n=5)

Precedent transactions: what is on the tape and why

The precedent tape holds the M&A transactions in Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services 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. 49 transactions were recorded for this industry; 25 are shown. 24 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 tape 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 tape: 28 × deal value unit unresolved; 1 × self transaction; 8 × divestiture roles reassigned; 1 × parent financials detached. 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 15, 2026. Treasury yields are published by the U.S. Department of the Treasury. 1575 source documents stand behind this report; by publisher domain: sec.gov (1571), 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 Cloud Infrastructure and Platform Services?

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

Get your reportTalk to advisory