NIQ Global Intelligence vs TransUnion
NIQ and TRU side by side. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How NIQ and TRU compare
TransUnion is the larger company, worth 2.5 times as much as NIQ Global Intelligence ($14.7B against $5.8B).
TransUnion grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (12.4% versus 8.9% for NIQ Global Intelligence).
TransUnion keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 15.1% compared with −8.0% at NIQ Global Intelligence.
TransUnion pays a dividend yielding 0.64%; NIQ Global Intelligence does not pay one.
TransUnion scores higher on the StockData Score (18 against 2 for NIQ Global Intelligence), 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 | NIQ | TRU |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $5.8B | $14.7B |
| Share price | $19.83 | $76.79 |
| Change, 1 year | 55.0% | −4.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 37.9% | −32.4% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.84 | 1.50 |
| Employees | 39K | 14K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 2 | 18 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 5 (better) |
| Growth score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 1 | 2 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 20.3× |
| P/S | 1.3× (better) | 3.0× |
| P/B | 6.4× | 3.0× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 12.7× (better) | 12.9× |
| P/FCF | 11.6× (better) | 18.7× |
| PEG | – | 1.07 |
| FCF yield | 8.7% (better) | 5.4% |
| Fair value | – | $115.45 |
| Margin of safety | – | 33.5% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 8.9% | 12.4% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | – | 12.6% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 88.4% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 90.5% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 5.3% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 55.4% | – |
| Operating margin | 1.9% | 18.7% (better) |
| Net margin | −8.0% | 15.1% (better) |
| FCF margin | 11.5% | 16.1% (better) |
| Return on equity | −65.3% | 15.8% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 1.6% | 8.0% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 3.91 | 1.15 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 4.33 | 3.12 (better) |
| Interest coverage | – | 3.6× |
| Current ratio | 1.09 | 1.90 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 0.86 | 2.35 (better) |
| 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 | – | 2.4% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 3.1% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 84.4% | 112% |
| Held by insiders | – | 0.78% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $1.0M (better) | −$9.3M |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 6.2% |
Go deeper
- NIQ stock overview
- NIQ income statement
- NIQ 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.