Fair Isaac vs TransUnion
FICO and TRU side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How FICO and TRU compare
Fair Isaac and TransUnion are about the same size, with market caps of $15.4B and $14.7B.
On earnings, TransUnion is cheaper: it trades at 20.3× trailing earnings, against 20.5× for Fair Isaac.
Fair Isaac grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (24.1% versus 12.4% for TransUnion).
Fair Isaac keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 34.1% compared with 15.1% at TransUnion.
TransUnion pays a dividend yielding 0.64%; Fair Isaac does not pay one.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | FICO | TRU |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $15.4B | $14.7B |
| Share price | $711.23 | $76.79 |
| Change, 1 year | −54.6% | −4.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 87.1% | −32.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.17 | 1.50 |
| Employees | 3,811 | 14K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 18 | 18 |
| Valuation score | 5 | 5 |
| Growth score | 6 (better) | 3 |
| Performance score | 4 | 4 |
| Health score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 20.5× | 20.3× (better) |
| P/S | 6.4× | 3.0× (better) |
| P/B | – | 3.0× |
| EV/EBITDA | 16.5× | 12.9× (better) |
| P/FCF | 15.4× (better) | 18.7× |
| PEG | 0.88 (better) | 1.07 |
| FCF yield | 6.5% (better) | 5.4% |
| Fair value | $1305.79 | $115.45 |
| Margin of safety | 45.5% (better) | 33.5% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 24.1% (better) | 12.4% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.0% | 12.6% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 28.8% | 88.4% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 35.4% | 90.5% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 27.4% (better) | 5.3% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 85.1% | – |
| Operating margin | 51.7% (better) | 18.7% |
| Net margin | 34.1% (better) | 15.1% |
| FCF margin | 41.6% (better) | 16.1% |
| Return on equity | – | 15.8% |
| Return on invested capital | 77.9% (better) | 8.0% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 1.15 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 4.26 | 3.12 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 6.6× (better) | 3.6× |
| Current ratio | 1.18 | 1.90 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 8.34 (better) | 2.35 |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 | 8 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.64% |
| Payout ratio | – | 12.9% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 1 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 43.7% |
| Buyback yield | 23.4% (better) | 2.4% |
| Shareholder yield | 23.4% (better) | 3.1% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 100.0% | 112% |
| Held by insiders | 3.2% | 0.78% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$10.6M | −$9.3M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 5 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 10.8% | 6.2% |
Go deeper
- FICO stock overview
- FICO income statement
- FICO valuation and score
- TRU stock overview
- TRU income statement
- TRU valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.