FDS vs ICE

For growth investors, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.

(ICE) is the stronger pick with 7. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 4% for FactSet Research Systems Inc. (FDS). FactSet Research Systems Inc. (FDS) offers the better valuation at 14. 4x trailing P/E (12. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) a "Buy" — based on 36 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.

On trailing P/E, FactSet Research Systems Inc.

(FDS) is the cheapest at 14. 4x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. at 27. 0x. On forward P/E, FactSet Research Systems Inc. is actually cheaper at 12. 6x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: FactSet Research Systems Inc. wins at 1. 26x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. 's 2. 18x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.

Over the past 5 years, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.

(ICE) delivered a total return of +43. 7%, compared to -27. 5% for FactSet Research Systems Inc. (FDS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ICE returned +224. 7% versus FDS's +68. 3%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.

(ICE) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 30β versus FactSet Research Systems Inc. 's 0. 36β — meaning FDS is approximately 21% more volatile than ICE relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 70% versus 71% for FactSet Research Systems Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.

(ICE) is pulling ahead at 7. 5% versus 5. 4% for FactSet Research Systems Inc. (FDS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. grew EPS 20. 7% year-over-year, compared to 11. 8% for FactSet Research Systems Inc.. 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.

Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.

(ICE) is the more profitable company, earning 26. 1% net margin versus 25. 7% for FactSet Research Systems Inc. — meaning it keeps 26. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ICE leads at 38. 7% versus 32. 2% for FDS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ICE leads at 61. 9%, 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.

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, FactSet Research Systems Inc. (FDS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 26x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. 's 2. 18x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, FactSet Research Systems Inc. (FDS) trades at 12. 6x forward P/E versus 19. 3x for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. — 6. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ICE: 25. 6% to $195. 71.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

FactSet Research Systems Inc. (FDS) offers the highest yield at 1. 9%, versus 1. 2% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.

(ICE) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 30), 1. 2% yield, +224. 7% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ICE: +224. 7%, FDS: +68. 3%), 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.

Both stocks operate in the Financial Services sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

In terms of investment character: FDS is a small-cap deep-value stock; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. 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.