ICE vs NDAQ

For growth investors, Nasdaq, Inc.

(NDAQ) is the stronger pick with 11. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 7. 5% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE). Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) offers the better valuation at 26. 9x trailing P/E (19. 4x 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, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.

(ICE) is the cheapest at 26. 9x versus Nasdaq, Inc. at 28. 8x. On forward P/E, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. is actually cheaper at 19. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Nasdaq, Inc. wins at 2. 12x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. 's 2. 18x.

Over the past 5 years, Nasdaq, Inc.

(NDAQ) delivered a total return of +71. 4%, compared to +42. 7% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NDAQ returned +356. 8% versus ICE's +231. 9%. 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. 33β versus Nasdaq, Inc. 's 0. 78β — meaning NDAQ is approximately 139% 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 81% for Nasdaq, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Nasdaq, Inc.

(NDAQ) is pulling ahead at 11. 1% versus 7. 5% for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Nasdaq, Inc. grew EPS 60. 1% year-over-year, compared to 20. 7% for Intercontinental Exchange, 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 21. 8% for Nasdaq, 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 28. 4% for NDAQ. 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, Nasdaq, Inc. (NDAQ) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 2. 12x versus Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. 's 2. 18x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) trades at 19. 4x forward P/E versus 22. 6x for Nasdaq, Inc. — 3. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for NDAQ: 28. 8% to $114. 60.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (ICE) offers the highest yield at 1. 2%, versus 1. 2% for Nasdaq, Inc. (NDAQ).

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. 33), 1. 2% yield, +231. 9% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ICE: +231. 9%, NDAQ: +356. 8%), 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.

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.