The most important rule in Infosys vs Coforge is simple:

do not compare acquisition-enhanced reported growth with organic constant-currency growth.

That would make Coforge appear dramatically stronger than the underlying continuing business actually was in Q1.

For Bull Run's related research, see Infosys, Coforge, How to Analyse IT Services Stocks, Infosys vs Tech Mahindra and Persistent Systems vs Coforge.

Q1 FY27 operating comparison

Start with the growth bridge, not the headline

Coforge's Q1 reported revenue was $592.2 million.

That was up approximately:

• 21.1% sequentially in dollars, and
• 33.3% year on year in dollars.

But the quarter included the first consolidation of Encora.

Encora contributed approximately $100.7 million for May and June.

The $491.5-million number is a Bull Run analytical subtraction.

It is not an official standalone Coforge revenue disclosure because acquisition accounting and eliminations can affect the exact legal-entity bridge.

Its purpose is simply to demonstrate how material Encora was to the reported quarter.

The cleaner growth hierarchy is 33.3%, 1.1% and 5.2%

The best evidence of Coforge's underlying momentum is therefore not 33% reported growth.

It is the approximately 5.2% sequential CC growth of the continuing portfolio.

That remains very strong.

Infosys's growth is slower but much larger in absolute dollars

Infosys generated $5.082 billion of Q1 revenue.

Coforge generated $592.2 million including Encora.

Infosys therefore remains roughly 8.6 times larger.

This means a 2.4% YoY increase at Infosys can represent a substantial absolute revenue addition even though the percentage looks modest.

Coforge has the denominator advantage.

A $100-million contract can materially change its growth rate.

The same contract is much smaller relative to Infosys.

The margin gap still favours Infosys decisively

Infosys currently produces materially more operating profit for each revenue dollar.

Coforge's advantage is the rate of improvement.

Its consolidated EBIT margin expanded sharply year on year and came in ahead of the company's full-year margin guidance.

Encora margin integration is progressing faster than feared

Large acquisitions often dilute margins initially because of:

• integration expense,
• duplicated corporate costs,
• purchase accounting,
• employee retention costs,
• transition inefficiencies.

Coforge nevertheless reported a 20.3% EBITDA margin and a 16.0% EBIT margin in the first quarter containing Encora revenue.

That is an encouraging sign.

Management has also targeted substantial G&A cost synergies from the combination.

EBIT matters more than EBITDA after an acquisition

Coforge's EBITDA margin was 20.3%.

Its EBIT margin was 16.0%.

The difference includes depreciation and amortisation.

After acquisitions, amortisation of acquired intangible assets can rise materially.

Investors who focus only on EBITDA can therefore overstate the economic profitability of acquisition-led expansion.

The $550 million acquisition loan creates a real hurdle

Coforge funded part of the Encora transaction using a $550 million three-year loan at a fixed 4.6% rate.

That implies meaningful annual interest expense.

The acquisition also involved issuing Coforge shares to Encora sellers.

Shareholders should therefore evaluate the transaction after:

• interest expense,
• equity dilution,
• amortisation,
• integration costs,
• synergies.

Acquired revenue is economically valuable only if incremental profit exceeds those costs.

Infosys has almost no comparable balance-sheet stress

Infosys remains debt-light and highly cash generative.

Q1 free cash flow was approximately $955 million.

FCF conversion was more than 116% of net profit.

This gives Infosys substantial flexibility to:

• pay dividends,
• repurchase shares,
• make acquisitions,
• invest in AI,
• absorb macro volatility.

Coforge's cash conversion was healthy despite acquisition complexity

Coforge reported approximately $52.9 million of Q1 free cash flow.

FCF represented roughly 95.3% of PAT.

This is important.

The company is not producing headline EBIT growth while consuming all cash in working capital.

Still, future free cash flow must also fund acquisition-related financing obligations.

The order-book comparison is more interesting than the revenue comparison

Infosys reported $3.6 billion of large-deal TCV.

61% was net new.

Coforge reported:

• $691 million of Q1 order intake,
• $2.23 billion of next-twelve-month signed executable order book.

The methodologies differ, so the numbers should not be divided mechanically.

But the Coforge executable order book is remarkable relative to its current revenue scale.

Coforge's signed book approaches one year of current revenue

Annualising Q1's $592.2-million consolidated revenue gives approximately $2.37 billion.

The next-twelve-month signed order book of $2.23 billion is therefore close to the company's current annualised quarterly revenue run-rate.

This is not a guarantee of future revenue.

Contracts can ramp at different speeds.

But it provides strong visibility.

Infosys's 61% net-new share matters

Of Infosys's $3.6 billion of large-deal TCV, 61% was classified as net new.

A simple multiplication implies approximately $2.2 billion of net-new TCV.

That dollar amount is an analytical calculation rather than a separately reported company figure.

Net-new contracts matter because they create incremental workload rather than simply renewing existing revenue.

AI disclosures sound similar but mean different things

Infosys reported AI at 8.2% of revenue.

Coforge said approximately 86% of revenue comes from AI-led engineering, data and cloud services.

The two statistics are not remotely equivalent.

Coforge does not generate 86% pure AI revenue

The 86% category combines:

• AI-led engineering,
• data,
• cloud.

A cloud-modernisation contract can fall inside that category even if only part of the programme is attributable to AI.

It would therefore be misleading to state that 86% of Coforge's sales are AI revenue.

Infosys has the cleaner measurable AI-revenue signal

Infosys's 8.2% share can be translated analytically:

$5.082 billion × 8.2% ≈ $417 million.

That is a Bull Run calculation rather than a separate Infosys disclosure.

It demonstrates that Infosys's AI business already has substantial commercial scale.

Coforge may have greater engineering intensity

The Encora acquisition deepens Coforge in:

• product engineering,
• data,
• cloud,
• AI-native engineering,
• Latin American delivery.

This can position Coforge particularly well for clients redesigning software products around generative and agentic AI.

The strategic opportunity is narrower than Infosys's enterprise breadth but potentially faster growing.

The AI value chain can reward both models

Valuation makes the trade-off much harder for Coforge

Coforge traded at more than three times Infosys's earnings multiple.

That is a very demanding valuation gap.

The market is paying for:

• faster underlying growth,
• Encora synergies,
• AI-led engineering demand,
• large order visibility,
• future margin expansion.

The post-Encora share count matters

Bull Run's August 25 Coforge page showed a lower market capitalisation than fresh August 31 sources.

The difference reflects the need to incorporate acquisition-related equity issuance correctly.

Fresh market capitalisation is therefore preferred for valuation comparisons.

The Bull Run page remains useful for:

• price history,
• ROE,
• technical data,
• fundamental context.

Coforge's valuation leaves little room for a failed integration

At around 50x trailing earnings, investors need more than one good acquisition quarter.

Coforge likely needs:

• continued double-digit organic growth,
• successful Encora cross-selling,
• margin expansion,
• strong FCF conversion,
• rapid debt reduction or refinancing discipline.

If growth normalises toward large-cap IT before synergies arrive, valuation compression can offset earnings growth.

Infosys's lower P/E requires fewer optimistic assumptions

Infosys does not need 20% revenue growth.

At roughly 15x earnings, a combination of:

• low-to-mid-single-digit revenue growth,
• 20–22% operating margin,
• AI revenue expansion,
• strong FCF,
• capital returns

can still create reasonable earnings compounding.

Which has better current growth?

Coforge after proper normalization.

Reported growth is acquisition-enhanced, but the continuing portfolio still grew about 5.2% sequentially in constant currency after planned exits.

Infosys grew 1.0% sequentially CC.

Which has better margins?

Infosys.

21.1% operating margin versus Coforge's 16.0% consolidated EBIT margin.

Which has more margin upside?

Coforge.

It starts from a lower margin base and can benefit from Encora cost synergies.

Which has better cash-generation quality?

Infosys.

$955 million of quarterly FCF versus Coforge's $52.9 million, with both showing healthy profit conversion.

Which has stronger forward order visibility relative to size?

Coforge.

Its $2.23-billion next-twelve-month signed order book is enormous relative to current revenue.

Which has cleaner AI-revenue disclosure?

Infosys.

It directly reports AI at 8.2% of revenue.

Coforge's 86% statistic is a combined AI-led engineering, data and cloud service category.

Which has lower financial risk?

Infosys.

Coforge is integrating a transformative acquisition funded partly with $550 million of debt and equity issuance.

Which is cheaper?

Infosys by a very wide margin.

Approximately 14.7x trailing earnings versus Coforge around 50x at the end of August.

Infosys vs Coforge: category-by-category

Which is stronger in 2026?

Infosys currently has the stronger risk-adjusted setup.

It combines:

• 21.1% margin,
• 31%+ ROE,
• AI at 8.2% of revenue,
• $3.6 billion of large deals,
• $955 million of FCF,
• a roughly 15x P/E.

Coforge has the stronger high-growth optionality.

Its continuing organic business is growing faster, the $2.23-billion order book is powerful, and Encora materially expands engineering capabilities.

But investors are paying a much higher multiple while accepting debt, dilution and integration risk.

The current trade-off is:

Infosys = slower but highly profitable, cash-rich and inexpensive.

Coforge = faster engineering-led growth with acquisition synergies, but far higher execution and valuation requirements.

What to monitor next

• Coforge organic CC growth: the best measure after Encora normalisation.
• Coforge Encora contribution: acquired revenue should continue growing rather than remain a static addition.
• Coforge EBIT margin: synergy success should become visible here.
• Coforge executable order book: $2.23 billion must convert into actual revenue.
• Coforge debt and interest: acquisition economics should be measured after financing cost.
• Infosys AI share: watch whether 8.2% continues rising.
• Infosys large-deal net-new mix: net-new TCV is more useful for growth than renewals alone.
• Infosys FCF conversion: sustained 100%+ conversion remains a major quality advantage.
• Infosys FY27 guidance: growth needs to stabilise while margin remains within 20–22%.

Frequently asked questions