Fair Isaac vs Paymentus
FICO and PAY side by side, both in miscellaneous business services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How FICO and PAY compare
Fair Isaac is the larger company, worth 3.7 times as much as Paymentus ($15.4B against $4.1B).
On earnings, Fair Isaac is cheaper: it trades at 20.5× trailing earnings, against 49.7× for Paymentus.
Paymentus grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (30.2% versus 24.1% for Fair Isaac).
Fair Isaac keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 34.1% compared with 6.2% at Paymentus.
Fair Isaac scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 17 for Paymentus), 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 | FICO | PAY |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $15.4B | $4.1B |
| Share price | $711.23 | $32.82 |
| Change, 1 year | −54.6% | 11.6% |
| Change, 5 years | 87.1% | 19.5% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.17 | 1.44 |
| Employees | 3,811 | 1,340 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 18 (better) | 17 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 2 |
| Growth score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Performance score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 20.5× (better) | 49.7× |
| P/S | 6.4× | 3.0× (better) |
| P/B | – | 6.7× |
| EV/EBITDA | 16.5× (better) | 30.5× |
| P/FCF | 15.4× (better) | 26.0× |
| PEG | 0.88 | – |
| FCF yield | 6.5% (better) | 3.9% |
| Fair value | $1305.79 | $29.49 |
| Margin of safety | 45.5% (better) | −11.3% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 24.1% | 30.2% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.0% | 31.7% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 28.8% | 51.3% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 35.4% | 53.5% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 27.4% | 45.4% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 85.1% (better) | 24.9% |
| Operating margin | 51.7% (better) | 7.6% |
| Net margin | 34.1% (better) | 6.2% |
| FCF margin | 41.6% (better) | 11.7% |
| Return on equity | – | 15.0% |
| Return on invested capital | 77.9% (better) | 31.9% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.00 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 4.26 | – |
| Interest coverage | 6.6× | – |
| Current ratio | 1.18 | 4.89 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 8.34 | 25.55 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | 23.4% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 23.4% (better) | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 100.0% | 44.9% |
| Held by insiders | 3.2% | 63.1% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$10.6M | −$7.1M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 5 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 10.8% | 5.9% |
Go deeper
- FICO stock overview
- FICO income statement
- FICO valuation and score
- PAY stock overview
- PAY income statement
- PAY valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.