ExlService vs Fair Isaac
EXLS and FICO side by side, both in miscellaneous business services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How EXLS and FICO compare
Fair Isaac is the larger company, worth 2.4 times as much as ExlService ($15.4B against $6.3B).
On earnings, Fair Isaac is cheaper: it trades at 20.5× trailing earnings, against 26.1× for ExlService.
Fair Isaac grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (24.1% versus 13.6% for ExlService).
Fair Isaac keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 34.1% compared with 11.2% at ExlService.
Fair Isaac scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 17 for ExlService), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | EXLS | FICO |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $6.3B | $15.4B |
| Share price | $41.43 | $711.23 |
| Change, 1 year | 7.5% | −54.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 51.0% | 87.1% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.95 | 1.17 |
| Employees | 65K | 3,811 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 17 | 18 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 5 | 6 (better) |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 26.1× | 20.5× (better) |
| P/S | 2.8× (better) | 6.4× |
| P/B | 7.3× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 16.2× (better) | 16.5× |
| P/FCF | 22.8× | 15.4× (better) |
| PEG | 1.19 | 0.88 (better) |
| FCF yield | 4.4% | 6.5% (better) |
| Fair value | $40.92 | $1305.79 |
| Margin of safety | −1.3% | 45.5% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 13.6% | 24.1% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 16.8% (better) | 9.0% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 5.8% | 28.8% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 10.4% | 35.4% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 24.3% | 27.4% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 38.5% | 85.1% (better) |
| Operating margin | 14.9% | 51.7% (better) |
| Net margin | 11.2% | 34.1% (better) |
| FCF margin | 12.3% | 41.6% (better) |
| Return on equity | 25.9% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 26.5% | 77.9% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.44 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 0.25 (better) | 4.26 |
| Interest coverage | 18.3× (better) | 6.6× |
| Current ratio | 1.24 (better) | 1.18 |
| Altman Z-score | 7.64 | 8.34 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | 7.2% | 23.4% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 7.2% | 23.4% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 103% | 100.0% |
| Held by insiders | 2.1% | 3.2% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$2.7M (better) | −$10.6M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 5 |
| Short interest, % of float | 7.1% | 10.8% |
Go deeper
- EXLS stock overview
- EXLS income statement
- EXLS valuation and score
- FICO stock overview
- FICO income statement
- FICO valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.