Moodys vs TransUnion
MCO and TRU side by side, both in business services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How MCO and TRU compare
Moodys is the larger company, worth 5.8 times as much as TransUnion ($85.5B against $14.7B).
On earnings, TransUnion is cheaper: it trades at 20.3× trailing earnings, against 31.3× for Moodys.
TransUnion grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (12.4% versus 11.7% for Moodys).
Moodys keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 34.3% compared with 15.1% at TransUnion.
Both pay dividends: Moodys yields 0.82% and TransUnion 0.64%.
Moodys scores higher on the StockData Score (22 against 18 for TransUnion), 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 | MCO | TRU |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $85.5B | $14.7B |
| Share price | $493.91 | $76.79 |
| Change, 1 year | 4.7% | −4.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 27.6% | −32.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.21 | 1.50 |
| Employees | 5,300 | 14K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 22 (better) | 18 |
| Valuation score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 4 |
| Health score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 4 | 4 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 31.3× | 20.3× (better) |
| P/S | 10.5× | 3.0× (better) |
| P/B | 28.3× | 3.0× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 22.0× | 12.9× (better) |
| P/FCF | 28.8× | 18.7× (better) |
| PEG | 1.39 | 1.07 (better) |
| FCF yield | 3.5% | 5.4% (better) |
| Fair value | $512.62 | $115.45 |
| Margin of safety | 3.6% | 33.5% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 11.7% | 12.4% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.5% | 12.6% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 31.1% | 88.4% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 34.0% | 90.5% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 7.8% (better) | 5.3% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 75.0% | – |
| Operating margin | 44.8% (better) | 18.7% |
| Net margin | 34.3% (better) | 15.1% |
| FCF margin | 36.4% (better) | 16.1% |
| Return on equity | 80.2% (better) | 15.8% |
| Return on invested capital | 33.3% (better) | 8.0% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 2.30 | 1.15 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.31 (better) | 3.12 |
| Interest coverage | – | 3.6× |
| Current ratio | 1.19 | 1.90 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 7.70 (better) | 2.35 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 | 8 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.82% (better) | 0.64% |
| Payout ratio | 25.0% | 12.9% |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 10.9% | 43.7% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 3.6% (better) | 2.4% |
| Shareholder yield | 4.5% (better) | 3.1% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 91.5% | 112% |
| Held by insiders | 0.12% | 0.78% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$13.0M | −$9.3M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 12 | – |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.6% | 6.2% |
Go deeper
- MCO stock overview
- MCO income statement
- MCO 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.