Moodys vs Verisk Analytics
MCO and VRSK side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How MCO and VRSK compare
Moodys is the larger company, worth 3.2 times as much as Verisk Analytics ($87.6B against $27.0B).
On earnings, Moodys is cheaper: it trades at 31.0× trailing earnings, against 31.5× for Verisk Analytics.
Moodys grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (9.0% versus 4.9% for Verisk Analytics).
Moodys keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 35.3% compared with 27.7% at Verisk Analytics.
Both pay dividends: Moodys yields 0.79% and Verisk Analytics 0.94%.
Moodys scores higher on the StockData Score (21 against 15 for Verisk Analytics), 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 | VRSK |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $87.6B | $27.0B |
| Share price | $508.20 | $207.82 |
| Change, 1 year | 3.5% | −2.4% |
| Change, 5 years | 31.2% | −9.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.19 | 0.60 |
| Employees | 5,300 | 8,000 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 21 (better) | 15 |
| Valuation score | 3 | 3 |
| Growth score | 4 (better) | 2 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 3 |
| Health score | 4 | 4 |
| Dividend score | 4 (better) | 3 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 31.0× (better) | 31.5× |
| P/S | 10.7× | 8.5× (better) |
| P/B | 26.8× | – |
| EV/EBITDA | 22.5× | 18.6× (better) |
| P/FCF | 29.4× | 24.6× (better) |
| PEG | 1.38 (better) | 12.12 |
| FCF yield | 3.4% | 4.1% (better) |
| Fair value | $520.91 | $219.92 |
| Margin of safety | 2.4% | 5.5% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 9.0% (better) | 4.9% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 7.5% (better) | 6.2% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 28.5% (better) | −4.6% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 31.9% (better) | 0.61% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 7.8% | 8.5% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 74.6% (better) | 70.2% |
| Operating margin | 44.6% (better) | 43.9% |
| Net margin | 35.3% (better) | 27.7% |
| FCF margin | 36.4% (better) | 34.6% |
| Return on equity | 79.8% | – |
| Return on invested capital | 33.0% | 36.6% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 2.11 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.28 (better) | 2.37 |
| Interest coverage | – | 6.8× |
| Current ratio | 1.29 (better) | 1.07 |
| Altman Z-score | 7.89 (better) | 7.16 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 | 8 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 0.79% | 0.94% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 24.6% | 29.3% |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 | – |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 10.9% | – |
| Buyback yield | 3.4% | 7.0% (better) |
| Shareholder yield | 4.2% | 7.9% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 91.9% | 98.7% |
| Held by insiders | 0.12% | 0.29% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$19.0M | −$6.7M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 12 (better) | 3 |
| Short interest, % of float | 1.8% | 3.3% |
Go deeper
- MCO stock overview
- MCO income statement
- MCO valuation and score
- VRSK stock overview
- VRSK income statement
- VRSK valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.