Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
FDS vs TRI vs SPGI vs MSCI
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Specialty Business Services
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
FDS vs TRI vs SPGI vs MSCI — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges | Specialty Business Services | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges |
| Market Cap | $9.62B | $40.53B | $124.36B | $42.62B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $2.32B | $7.69B | $15.34B | $3.13B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $600M | $1.53B | $4.78B | $1.32B |
| Gross Margin | 52.7% | 72.4% | 70.2% | 82.4% |
| Operating Margin | 32.2% | 28.8% | 42.2% | 54.7% |
| Forward P/E | 12.6x | 21.1x | 21.4x | 29.8x |
| Total Debt | $1.56B | $2.12B | $14.20B | $6.31B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $338M | $511M | $1.75B | $515M |
FDS vs TRI vs SPGI vs MSCI — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| FactSet Research Sy… (FDS) | 100 | 72.7 | -27.3% |
| Thomson Reuters Cor… (TRI) | 100 | 130.9 | +30.9% |
| S&P Global Inc. (SPGI) | 100 | 129.3 | +29.3% |
| MSCI Inc. (MSCI) | 100 | 178.0 | +78.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FDS vs TRI vs SPGI vs MSCI
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FDS is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and valuation efficiency.
- Dividend streak 21 yrs, beta 0.36, yield 1.9%
- PEG 1.26 vs TRI's 2.81
- Beta 0.36, yield 1.9%, current ratio 1.40x
- Lower P/E (12.6x vs 29.8x), PEG 1.26 vs 1.76
TRI is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.33, Low D/E 17.8%, current ratio 0.64x
- Beta 0.33 vs MSCI's 0.58
- 2.5% yield, 7-year raise streak, vs FDS's 1.9%
SPGI is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 7.9%, EPS growth 18.7%
MSCI carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding.
- 7.2% 10Y total return vs SPGI's 328.9%
- 9.7% NII/revenue growth vs TRI's 4.8%
- 38.4% margin vs TRI's 19.9%
- +6.3% vs FDS's -49.2%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 9.7% NII/revenue growth vs TRI's 4.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (12.6x vs 29.8x), PEG 1.26 vs 1.76 | |
| Quality / Margins | 38.4% margin vs TRI's 19.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.33 vs MSCI's 0.58 | |
| Dividends | 2.5% yield, 7-year raise streak, vs FDS's 1.9% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +6.3% vs FDS's -49.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 24.0% ROA vs SPGI's 7.9%, ROIC 34.9% vs 9.7% |
FDS vs TRI vs SPGI vs MSCI — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
FDS vs TRI vs SPGI vs MSCI — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MSCI leads in 3 of 6 categories
FDS leads 1 • TRI leads 0 • SPGI leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MSCI leads this category, winning 5 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SPGI is the larger business by revenue, generating $15.3B annually — 6.6x FDS's $2.3B. MSCI is the more profitable business, keeping 38.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to TRI's 19.9%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $2.3B | $7.7B | $15.3B | $3.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $947M | $3.2B | $7.8B | $2.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $600M | $1.5B | $4.8B | $1.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $647M | $2.1B | $5.6B | $1.5B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +52.7% | +72.4% | +70.2% | +82.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +32.2% | +28.8% | +42.2% | +54.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +25.7% | +19.9% | +29.2% | +38.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +26.6% | +27.2% | +35.6% | +49.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +9.8% | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +4.4% | +7.6% | +32.5% | +49.1% |
Valuation Metrics
FDS leads this category, winning 6 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 14.4x trailing earnings, FDS trades at a 62% valuation discount to MSCI's 37.6x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), FDS offers better value at 1.44x vs TRI's 3.64x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $9.6B | $40.5B | $124.4B | $42.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $10.8B | $42.1B | $136.8B | $48.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 14.38x | 27.34x | 28.66x | 37.62x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 12.60x | 21.09x | 21.40x | 29.83x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.44x | 3.64x | 3.29x | 2.22x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 11.57x | 14.29x | 17.87x | 25.06x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 4.14x | 5.33x | 8.11x | 13.60x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.93x | 3.51x | 3.55x | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 15.58x | 19.75x | 22.79x | 27.51x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MSCI leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
FDS delivers a 27.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $28 in annual profit, vs $13 for TRI. TRI carries lower financial leverage with a 0.18x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FDS's 0.71x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MSCI scores 8/9 vs TRI's 6/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +27.7% | +12.7% | +12.9% | — |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +14.2% | +8.5% | +7.9% | +24.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +15.5% | +11.2% | +9.7% | +34.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +20.9% | +13.6% | +12.1% | +44.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.71x | 0.18x | 0.39x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1.2B | $1.6B | $12.5B | $5.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $338M | $511M | $1.7B | $515M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.6B | $2.1B | $14.2B | $6.3B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 14.22x | 13.88x | 22.69x | 7.67x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MSCI leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MSCI five years ago would be worth $12,876 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $7,249 for FDS. Over the past 12 months, MSCI leads with a +6.3% total return vs FDS's -49.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MSCI at 8.6% vs FDS's -16.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -21.1% | -26.1% | -17.9% | +3.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -49.2% | -49.1% | -16.5% | +6.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -41.4% | -17.4% | +21.4% | +28.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -27.5% | +7.5% | +12.2% | +28.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +68.3% | +156.3% | +328.9% | +717.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -16.3% | -6.2% | +6.7% | +8.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — TRI and MSCI each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TRI is the less volatile stock with a 0.33 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MSCI's 0.58 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MSCI currently trades 93.5% from its 52-week high vs TRI's 41.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.36x | 0.33x | 0.55x | 0.58x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $474.79 | $221.97 | $579.05 | $626.28 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $189.07 | $79.71 | $381.61 | $501.08 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +47.1% | +41.9% | +72.6% | +93.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 50.0 | 51.4 | 47.6 | 57.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 899K | 2.2M | 1.8M | 519K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — FDS and TRI each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: FDS as "Hold", TRI as "Buy", SPGI as "Buy", MSCI as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 48.1% upside for TRI (target: $138) vs 15.2% for MSCI (target: $674). For income investors, TRI offers the higher dividend yield at 2.52% vs SPGI's 0.91%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $277.89 | $137.67 | $548.11 | $674.33 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 28 | 27 | 28 | 27 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +1.9% | +2.5% | +0.9% | +1.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 21 | 7 | 12 | 11 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $4.17 | $2.34 | $3.83 | $7.20 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +3.1% | +2.5% | +4.0% | +5.8% |
MSCI leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). FDS leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
FDS vs TRI vs SPGI vs MSCI: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FDS or TRI or SPGI or MSCI a better buy right now?
For growth investors, MSCI Inc.
(MSCI) is the stronger pick with 9. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 4. 8% for Thomson Reuters Corporation (TRI). 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 Thomson Reuters Corporation (TRI) a "Buy" — based on 27 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 — FDS or TRI or SPGI or MSCI?
On trailing P/E, FactSet Research Systems Inc.
(FDS) is the cheapest at 14. 4x versus MSCI Inc. at 37. 6x. 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 Thomson Reuters Corporation's 2. 81x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — FDS or TRI or SPGI or MSCI?
Over the past 5 years, MSCI Inc.
(MSCI) delivered a total return of +28. 8%, compared to -27. 5% for FactSet Research Systems Inc. (FDS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MSCI returned +717. 0% 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.
04Which is safer — FDS or TRI or SPGI or MSCI?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Thomson Reuters Corporation (TRI) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
33β versus MSCI Inc. 's 0. 58β — meaning MSCI is approximately 73% more volatile than TRI relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Thomson Reuters Corporation (TRI) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 18% versus 71% for FactSet Research Systems Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — FDS or TRI or SPGI or MSCI?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), MSCI Inc.
(MSCI) is pulling ahead at 9. 7% versus 4. 8% for Thomson Reuters Corporation (TRI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: S&P Global Inc. grew EPS 18. 7% year-over-year, compared to -30. 5% for Thomson Reuters Corporation. 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 — FDS or TRI or SPGI or MSCI?
MSCI Inc.
(MSCI) is the more profitable company, earning 38. 4% net margin versus 20. 1% for Thomson Reuters Corporation — meaning it keeps 38. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MSCI leads at 54. 7% versus 26. 3% for TRI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MSCI leads at 82. 4%, 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 FDS or TRI or SPGI or MSCI 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, FactSet Research Systems Inc. (FDS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 26x versus Thomson Reuters Corporation's 2. 81x. 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 29. 8x for MSCI Inc. — 17. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for TRI: 48. 1% to $137. 67.
08Which pays a better dividend — FDS or TRI or SPGI or MSCI?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Thomson Reuters Corporation (TRI) offers the highest yield at 2. 5%, versus 0. 9% for S&P Global Inc. (SPGI).
09Is FDS or TRI or SPGI or MSCI better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, MSCI Inc.
(MSCI) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 58), 1. 2% yield, +717. 0% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MSCI: +717. 0%, 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.
10What are the main differences between FDS and TRI and SPGI and MSCI?
These companies operate in different sectors (FDS (Financial Services) and TRI (Industrials) and SPGI (Financial Services) and MSCI (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: FDS is a small-cap deep-value stock; TRI is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; SPGI is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; MSCI 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.
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.