Fair Isaac vs MSCI
FICO and MSCI 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 MSCI compare
MSCI is the larger company, worth 3.0 times as much as Fair Isaac ($47.1B against $15.6B).
On earnings, Fair Isaac is cheaper: it trades at 19.8× trailing earnings, against 34.8× for MSCI.
Fair Isaac grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (27.3% versus 12.3% for MSCI).
MSCI keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 40.3% compared with 32.9% at Fair Isaac.
MSCI pays a dividend yielding 1.2%; Fair Isaac does not pay one.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | FICO | MSCI |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $15.6B | $47.1B |
| Share price | $720.19 | $658.17 |
| Change, 1 year | −59.5% | 13.3% |
| Change, 5 years | 101% | 0.20% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.19 | 1.16 |
| Employees | 3,747 | 6,268 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 18 | 18 |
| Valuation score | 5 (better) | 2 |
| Growth score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Performance score | 4 | 4 |
| Health score | 3 | 3 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 19.8× (better) | 34.8× |
| P/S | 6.1× (better) | 13.7× |
| EV/EBITDA | 16.1× (better) | 27.6× |
| P/FCF | 14.5× (better) | 29.9× |
| PEG | 0.68 (better) | 2.57 |
| FCF yield | 6.9% (better) | 3.3% |
| Fair value | $1361.38 | $594.74 |
| Margin of safety | 47.1% (better) | −10.7% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 27.3% (better) | 12.3% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 14.0% (better) | 13.1% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 28.1% (better) | 13.1% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 36.9% (better) | 19.7% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 22.1% (better) | 17.1% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 86.1% (better) | 82.9% |
| Operating margin | 49.9% | 55.7% (better) |
| Net margin | 32.9% | 40.3% (better) |
| FCF margin | 42.2% | 45.9% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 82.0% (better) | 49.1% |
| Financial health | ||
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.93 | 3.33 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 5.7× | 6.9× (better) |
| Current ratio | 0.99 (better) | 0.82 |
| Altman Z-score | 8.43 (better) | 6.48 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 | 8 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 1.2% |
| Payout ratio | – | 42.1% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 11 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 19.8% |
| Buyback yield | 19.6% (better) | 4.3% |
| Shareholder yield | 19.6% (better) | 5.5% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 100.0% | 94.4% |
| Held by insiders | 3.2% | 3.6% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$6.0M | $7.1M (better) |
| Superinvestors holding | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Short interest, % of float | 12.1% | 2.0% |
Go deeper
- FICO stock overview
- FICO income statement
- FICO valuation and score
- MSCI stock overview
- MSCI income statement
- MSCI valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.