See inside every stock. Pro
S&P 5007,663▼ 1.21%Nasdaq26,009▼ 2.60%Dow Jones52,868▲ 0.02%Nasdaq 10028,959▼ 2.90%VIX19.03▲ 14.09%US Dollar101.62▼ 0.16%Gold spot4,093▼ 0.80%WTI100.72▲ 1.26%

Top 10 US growth stocks, ranked by growth score

184 S&P 500 companies pass our growth and health checks and are ranked on the growth score. The top 10 are shown. The ranking follows fixed rules and is not a recommendation: high-ranking stocks can still fall. Scores as of 22 Oct 2026.

Companies ranked184
Median Growth score66
IndexS&P 500
Updated22 Oct 2026
#1 Top of this list by our rules, not a recommendation

NVDA Nvidia Corp

Semiconductors · S&P 500 · confidence High
  • Highest growth score on the list
  • Fair-value check: Fair (+5% vs fair value range)
Open the full NVDA report →
93Growth score
out of 100
Valuation54
Growth93
Profitability61
Health66

Ranks 2 to 10

  1. 2 NEMNEWMONT Corp 92
    Valuation
    92
    Growth
    92
    Profit
    72
    Health
    91
    Undervalued Top 3 growthTop 3 financial health ›
  2. 3 MUMicron Technology Inc 92
    Valuation
    87
    Growth
    92
    Profit
    64
    Health
    91
    Fair Top financial healthTop 3 growth ›
  3. 4 DASHDoorDash, Inc. 92
    Valuation
    39
    Growth
    92
    Profit
    37
    Health
    55
    Fair ›
  4. 5 RDDTReddit, Inc. 92
    Valuation
    43
    Growth
    92
    Profit
    64
    Health
    84
    Fair ›
  5. 6 PODDInsulet Corp 91
    Valuation
    68
    Growth
    91
    Profit
    64
    Health
    67
    Undervalued ›
  6. 7 VRTVertiv Holdings Co 91
    Valuation
    30
    Growth
    91
    Profit
    68
    Health
    49
    Fair ›
  7. 8 UBERUber Technologies, Inc 91
    Valuation
    78
    Growth
    91
    Profit
    33
    Health
    47
    Fair ›
  8. 9 HOODRobinhood Markets, Inc. 91
    Valuation
    3
    Growth
    91
    Profit
    52
    Health
    40
    Overvalued ›
  9. 10 MNSTMonster Beverage Corp 91
    Valuation
    75
    Growth
    91
    Profit
    61
    Health
    87
    Undervalued ›

How this list is ranked

  • Universe. S&P 500 companies with a growth score of at least 50 and financial health of at least 40, confidence High or Medium.
  • Score. The growth score (0 to 100) measures revenue, EPS and free-cash-flow growth over the last three years, ranked within the sector. The health floor keeps fast growers with weak balance sheets out of the list.
  • Order. Sorted by the growth score (revenue, EPS and free-cash-flow growth over the last three years); ties go to the higher X-Ray score.
  • Data. Scores come from company filings with the SEC and our own fair-value models. Every figure is our own calculation, dated 22 Oct 2026.
  • Limits. Scores describe the past and the present, not the future. A company with less history gets a lower confidence label. Different rules give a different order, which is why the rules are printed here.

Why a ranking by stated rules and not a "best" label: the order changes with the rules, so the rules are published next to the list. See also how the X-Ray Score works.

What growth means in this score

The growth lens measures how fast revenue, earnings per share and free cash flow have grown over the last three years, and it is a percentile rank against companies in the same sector. That makes it a relative measure: a utility growing steadily at a mid-single-digit pace can score as well as a software company growing far faster, because each is compared with its own peers. The list keeps companies with a growth score of at least 50 and a financial-health score of at least 40, so fast growers that are borrowing their way there do not crowd it, then sorts by the growth score.

184 of the 484 scored companies pass the two filters, which is a reminder that growth in this sense is common; the ranking is about how far above peers a company sits.

Growth looks backward

Everything here is trailing. We hold no analyst estimates, so the lens knows what a company has done, not what it will do, and growth rates tend to fade as a company gets larger. A high growth score is a reason to look at the business, not evidence that the next three years will repeat the last three.

What the current top ten shows

The leader is Nvidia Corp, with a growth score of 93. The ten come from these sectors: 2 in Information Technology, 2 in Industrials, 1 in Materials, 1 in Consumer Discretionary, 1 in Communication Services, 1 in Health Care, 1 in Financials, 1 in Consumer Staples. Their valuation lens averages 57, where 50 is the middle of a company's own sector; at or above the middle, so in today's data growth is not coming at an unusually high price. Our fair-value models label 3 undervalued, 6 fair and 1 overvalued.

Reading growth next to price

The sensible next step after this list is to set growth against valuation: open the stock page and compare the growth lens with the valuation lens and the fair-value label, or check the undervalued list for growth companies that are not priced for perfection.

Questions about these US growth stocks

Is the growth score the same as expected growth?

No. It measures growth that has already happened over three years, relative to the company's sector. Expected growth would need analyst forecasts, which we do not use.

Why does a company with very fast growth sometimes rank below a slower one?

Two reasons: growth is scored against sector peers, so a fast grower in a fast sector may not stand out, and the list requires financial health of at least 40, which removes growth funded by weak finances.

Are growth stocks always expensive?

Often, but not always. The valuation lens and the fair-value label on each row show whether the price already reflects the growth; the section above reports how today's ten split.

How does this differ from the sector lists?

Sector lists rank companies on the whole X-Ray score within one sector. This list ranks the growth lens alone across all S&P 500 sectors, after the quality gate.

More Top lists

Educational ranking by stated rules, not investment advice. Figures are StocksXray calculations from public filings and exchange data; they can be wrong or out of date. Past performance does not predict future results.