Specialty Business Services
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CBZ vs FORR vs VRSK vs HURN vs MCO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Consulting Services
Consulting Services
Consulting Services
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
CBZ vs FORR vs VRSK vs HURN vs MCO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Specialty Business Services | Consulting Services | Consulting Services | Consulting Services | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges |
| Market Cap | $1.73B | $125M | $22.89B | $2.02B | $81.04B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $2.77B | $397M | $3.10B | $1.74B | $7.72B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $154M | $-119M | $910M | $104M | $2.50B |
| Gross Margin | 12.8% | 64.6% | 67.4% | 23.3% | 68.2% |
| Operating Margin | 8.3% | -20.9% | 44.9% | 11.3% | 44.8% |
| Forward P/E | 8.0x | 8.5x | 22.9x | 14.2x | 27.4x |
| Total Debt | $1.83B | $72M | $5.04B | $548M | $7.35B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $57M | $63M | $2.18B | $25M | $2.38B |
CBZ vs FORR vs VRSK vs HURN vs MCO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| CBIZ, Inc. (CBZ) | 100 | 139.6 | +39.6% |
| Forrester Research,… (FORR) | 100 | 20.8 | -79.2% |
| Verisk Analytics, I… (VRSK) | 100 | 101.2 | +1.2% |
| Huron Consulting Gr… (HURN) | 100 | 269.7 | +169.7% |
| Moody's Corporation (MCO) | 100 | 170.9 | +70.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CBZ vs FORR vs VRSK vs HURN vs MCO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CBZ carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 52.1%, EPS growth 134.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 25.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.65, current ratio 1.22x
- PEG 1.49 vs MCO's 3.51
- Beta 0.65, current ratio 1.22x
FORR lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
VRSK is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability is your priority.
- Dividend streak 7 yrs, beta -0.04, yield 1.0%
- 1.0% yield, 7-year raise streak, vs MCO's 0.9%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
- 16.7% ROA vs FORR's -28.2%, ROIC 33.0% vs 0.8%
Among these 5 stocks, HURN doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
MCO ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding.
- 409.5% 10Y total return vs CBZ's 210.4%
- 31.9% margin vs FORR's -30.1%
- -1.5% vs CBZ's -55.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 52.1% revenue growth vs FORR's -8.2% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.0x vs 27.4x), PEG 1.49 vs 3.51 | |
| Quality / Margins | 31.9% margin vs FORR's -30.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.65 vs MCO's 0.86, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.0% yield, 7-year raise streak, vs MCO's 0.9%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | -1.5% vs CBZ's -55.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 16.7% ROA vs FORR's -28.2%, ROIC 33.0% vs 0.8% |
CBZ vs FORR vs VRSK vs HURN vs MCO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CBZ vs FORR vs VRSK vs HURN vs MCO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
FORR leads in 1 of 6 categories
VRSK leads 1 • CBZ leads 0 • HURN leads 0 • MCO leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — VRSK and MCO each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MCO is the larger business by revenue, generating $7.7B annually — 19.4x FORR's $397M. MCO is the more profitable business, keeping 31.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FORR's -30.1%. On growth, HURN holds the edge at +14.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $2.8B | $397M | $3.1B | $1.7B | $7.7B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $328M | -$66M | $1.7B | $231M | $4.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $154M | -$119M | $910M | $104M | $2.5B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $239M | $18M | $1.1B | $124M | $3.0B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +12.8% | +64.6% | +67.4% | +23.3% | +68.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +8.3% | -20.9% | +44.9% | +11.3% | +44.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +5.6% | -30.1% | +29.3% | +6.0% | +31.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +8.6% | +4.6% | +36.3% | +7.1% | +33.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +1.3% | -6.5% | +3.9% | +14.2% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +37.7% | -79.1% | +4.8% | +0.8% | +7.8% |
Valuation Metrics
FORR leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 17.3x trailing earnings, CBZ trades at a 48% valuation discount to MCO's 33.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), VRSK offers better value at 3.16x vs MCO's 4.29x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.7B | $125M | $22.9B | $2.0B | $81.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $3.5B | $134M | $25.7B | $2.5B | $86.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 17.28x | -1.04x | 26.92x | 21.37x | 33.44x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 7.98x | 8.54x | 22.85x | 14.18x | 27.37x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 3.23x | — | 3.16x | — | 4.29x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 10.55x | 8.00x | 15.34x | 10.99x | 21.86x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.63x | 0.32x | 7.45x | 1.19x | 10.50x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.14x | 0.98x | 78.44x | 4.25x | 19.56x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 9.88x | 6.92x | 19.20x | 11.06x | 31.47x |
Profitability & Efficiency
VRSK leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
VRSK delivers a 4.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $4 in annual profit, vs $-81 for FORR. FORR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.57x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to VRSK's 16.26x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MCO scores 9/9 vs FORR's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +8.3% | -80.8% | +4.4% | +21.8% | +64.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.4% | -28.2% | +16.7% | +6.8% | +16.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +4.9% | +0.8% | +33.0% | +15.0% | +22.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +6.1% | +0.8% | +39.6% | +18.6% | +27.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 9 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.04x | 0.57x | 16.26x | 1.04x | 1.75x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.8B | $9M | $2.9B | $524M | $5.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $57M | $63M | $2.2B | $25M | $2.4B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.8B | $72M | $5.0B | $548M | $7.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.76x | -30.30x | 7.87x | 7.70x | 17.22x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — HURN and MCO each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in HURN five years ago would be worth $22,023 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,413 for FORR. Over the past 12 months, MCO leads with a -1.5% total return vs CBZ's -55.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors HURN at 17.6% vs FORR's -36.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -37.7% | -19.9% | -20.7% | -27.1% | -8.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -55.5% | -35.7% | -43.0% | -17.2% | -1.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -37.1% | -74.5% | -14.5% | +62.5% | +52.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -9.4% | -85.9% | +1.8% | +120.2% | +41.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +210.4% | -75.9% | +137.1% | +116.8% | +409.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -14.3% | -36.6% | -5.1% | +17.6% | +15.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — VRSK and MCO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
VRSK is the less volatile stock with a -0.04 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MCO's 0.86 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MCO currently trades 83.6% from its 52-week high vs CBZ's 40.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.65x | 0.68x | -0.04x | 0.82x | 0.86x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $77.91 | $11.57 | $322.92 | $186.78 | $546.88 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $24.30 | $4.88 | $161.70 | $112.45 | $402.28 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +40.6% | +56.4% | +54.1% | +66.8% | +83.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 47.9 | 51.6 | 39.5 | 37.4 | 48.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.2M | 109K | 1.9M | 243K | 1.1M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — VRSK and MCO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CBZ as "Buy", FORR as "Hold", VRSK as "Hold", HURN as "Buy", MCO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 60.3% upside for HURN (target: $200) vs 19.2% for MCO (target: $545). For income investors, VRSK offers the higher dividend yield at 1.03% vs MCO's 0.85%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $39.50 | — | $231.25 | $200.00 | $544.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 4 | 25 | 9 | 32 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +1.0% | — | +0.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 6 | 7 | 1 | 22 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $1.81 | — | $3.90 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +9.2% | +2.0% | +2.7% | +8.2% | +2.1% |
FORR leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). VRSK leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 4 tied.
CBZ vs FORR vs VRSK vs HURN vs MCO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CBZ or FORR or VRSK or HURN or MCO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, CBIZ, Inc.
(CBZ) is the stronger pick with 52. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -8. 2% for Forrester Research, Inc. (FORR). CBIZ, Inc. (CBZ) offers the better valuation at 17. 3x trailing P/E (8. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate CBIZ, Inc. (CBZ) a "Buy" — based on 2 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — CBZ or FORR or VRSK or HURN or MCO?
On trailing P/E, CBIZ, Inc.
(CBZ) is the cheapest at 17. 3x versus Moody's Corporation at 33. 4x. On forward P/E, CBIZ, Inc. is actually cheaper at 8. 0x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: CBIZ, Inc. wins at 1. 49x versus Moody's Corporation's 3. 51x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CBZ or FORR or VRSK or HURN or MCO?
Over the past 5 years, Huron Consulting Group Inc.
(HURN) delivered a total return of +120. 2%, compared to -85. 9% for Forrester Research, Inc. (FORR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MCO returned +409. 5% versus FORR's -75. 9%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — CBZ or FORR or VRSK or HURN or MCO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Verisk Analytics, Inc.
(VRSK) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 04β versus Moody's Corporation's 0. 86β — meaning MCO is approximately -2508% more volatile than VRSK relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Forrester Research, Inc. (FORR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 57% versus 16% for Verisk Analytics, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CBZ or FORR or VRSK or HURN or MCO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), CBIZ, Inc.
(CBZ) is pulling ahead at 52. 1% versus -8. 2% for Forrester Research, Inc. (FORR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: CBIZ, Inc. grew EPS 134. 6% year-over-year, compared to -1993. 3% for Forrester Research, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CBZ leads at 25. 0% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
06Which has better profit margins — CBZ or FORR or VRSK or HURN or MCO?
Moody's Corporation (MCO) is the more profitable company, earning 31.
9% net margin versus -30. 1% for Forrester Research, Inc. — meaning it keeps 31. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MCO leads at 44. 8% versus 0. 5% for FORR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MCO leads at 68. 2%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
07Is CBZ or FORR or VRSK or HURN or MCO more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, CBIZ, Inc. (CBZ) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 49x versus Moody's Corporation's 3. 51x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, CBIZ, Inc. (CBZ) trades at 8. 0x forward P/E versus 27. 4x for Moody's Corporation — 19. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for HURN: 60. 3% to $200. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — CBZ or FORR or VRSK or HURN or MCO?
In this comparison, VRSK (1.
0% yield), MCO (0. 9% yield) pay a dividend. CBZ, FORR, HURN do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CBZ or FORR or VRSK or HURN or MCO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Verisk Analytics, Inc.
(VRSK) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 04), 1. 0% yield, +137. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (VRSK: +137. 1%, FORR: -75. 9%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
10What are the main differences between CBZ and FORR and VRSK and HURN and MCO?
These companies operate in different sectors (CBZ (Industrials) and FORR (Industrials) and VRSK (Industrials) and HURN (Industrials) and MCO (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: CBZ is a small-cap high-growth stock; FORR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; VRSK is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; HURN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MCO is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. VRSK, MCO pay a dividend while CBZ, FORR, HURN do not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.