analyticsMarketing Tech
Data as of Q1 2026
Summary Verdict
CXM: 2—HUBS: 3wins
Rule of 40
26.1CXM
37.2HUBS
check_circleHUBS leads
Revenue Growth
7.6%CXM
20.5%HUBS
check_circleHUBS leads
Gross Margin
67%CXM
84%HUBS
check_circleHUBS leads
FCF Margin
18.4%CXM
16.8%HUBS
check_circleCXM leads
Operating Margin
4.7%CXM
-0.4%HUBS
check_circleCXM leads
NRR
—CXM
—HUBS
Metric
Rule of 40Efficiency score
CXM
26.1
HUBS
37.2check_circle
Revenue GrowthYoY
CXM
7.6%
HUBS
20.5%check_circle
Gross Margin% of revenue
CXM
67%
HUBS
84%check_circle
FCF MarginFree cash flow
CXM
18.4%check_circle
HUBS
16.8%
Operating MarginGAAP
CXM
4.7%check_circle
HUBS
-0.4%
NRRNet retention
CXM
N/A
HUBS
N/A
EV / RevenueValuation multiple
CXM
1.3xcheck_circle
HUBS
3.4x
Market CapUSD
CXM
$1.3B
HUBS
$11.3Bcheck_circle
ARR GrowthYoY
CXM
N/A
HUBS
N/A
CAC PaybackMonths to recover
CXM
N/A
HUBS
N/A
Advertisement
insights
Analysis
As of Q1 2026, Sprinklr, Inc. trades at 1.3x EV/Revenue versus HubSpot, Inc. at 3.4x. On the Rule of 40, Sprinklr, Inc. scores 26.1 compared to HubSpot, Inc.'s 37.2, placing HubSpot, Inc. ahead in operating efficiency. Gross margins stand at Sprinklr, Inc. 67% vs HubSpot, Inc. 84%.
Sector Context
Both companies operate in the Marketing Tech sector. The median columns above show where each company stands relative to their peers.