Software - Application
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
PAR vs RSKD vs TOST vs FICO vs TRU
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Software - Application
Software - Infrastructure
Software - Application
Consulting Services
PAR vs RSKD vs TOST vs FICO vs TRU — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Software - Application | Software - Application | Software - Infrastructure | Software - Application | Consulting Services |
| Market Cap | $617M | $825M | $17.02B | $26.20B | $14.07B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $476M | $345M | $6.45B | $2.26B | $4.73B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-76M | $-28M | $412M | $760M | $705M |
| Gross Margin | 40.1% | 51.5% | 26.2% | 84.2% | 52.7% |
| Operating Margin | -13.5% | -9.8% | 5.6% | 50.4% | 18.1% |
| Forward P/E | 28.3x | 20.8x | 23.7x | 26.4x | 15.3x |
| Total Debt | $402M | $25M | $40M | $3.07B | $5.16B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $80M | $162M | $1.35B | $134M | $854M |
PAR vs RSKD vs TOST vs FICO vs TRU — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Sep 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| PAR Technology Corp… (PAR) | 100 | 24.3 | -75.7% |
| Riskified Ltd. (RSKD) | 100 | 21.2 | -78.8% |
| Toast, Inc. (TOST) | 100 | 58.8 | -41.2% |
| Fair Isaac Corporat… (FICO) | 100 | 283.9 | +183.9% |
| TransUnion (TRU) | 100 | 65.0 | -35.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: PAR vs RSKD vs TOST vs FICO vs TRU
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
PAR ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth.
- 30.2% revenue growth vs RSKD's 5.2%
RSKD is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.05, Low D/E 8.5%, current ratio 5.03x
- Beta 1.05, current ratio 5.03x
- +2.0% vs PAR's -75.6%
TOST is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 24.1%, EPS growth 16.4%, 3Y rev CAGR 31.1%
FICO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.86
- 9.5% 10Y total return vs TRU's 142.0%
- PEG 0.96 vs TRU's 2.87
- 33.7% margin vs PAR's -16.0%
TRU is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if value and dividends is your priority.
- Lower P/E (15.3x vs 23.7x)
- 0.6% yield; 1-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 30.2% revenue growth vs RSKD's 5.2% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (15.3x vs 23.7x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 33.7% margin vs PAR's -16.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.86 vs PAR's 1.54 | |
| Dividends | 0.6% yield; 1-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +2.0% vs PAR's -75.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 39.8% ROA vs RSKD's -6.3%, ROIC 59.7% vs -22.2% |
PAR vs RSKD vs TOST vs FICO vs TRU — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
PAR vs RSKD vs TOST vs FICO vs TRU — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
FICO leads in 3 of 6 categories
TRU leads 1 • PAR leads 0 • RSKD leads 0 • TOST leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FICO leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TOST is the larger business by revenue, generating $6.4B annually — 18.7x RSKD's $345M. FICO is the more profitable business, keeping 33.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PAR's -16.0%. On growth, FICO holds the edge at +38.7% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $476M | $345M | $6.4B | $2.3B | $4.7B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$27M | -$27M | $409M | $1.2B | $1.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$76M | -$28M | $412M | $760M | $705M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$29M | $34M | $654M | $893M | $697M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +40.1% | +51.5% | +26.2% | +84.2% | +52.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -13.5% | -9.8% | +5.6% | +50.4% | +18.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -16.0% | -8.0% | +6.4% | +33.7% | +14.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -6.0% | +9.9% | +10.1% | +39.6% | +14.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +19.4% | +6.2% | +21.9% | +38.7% | +13.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +36.1% | +2.5% | +127.5% | +69.0% | +172.0% |
Valuation Metrics
TRU leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 31.4x trailing earnings, TRU trades at a 40% valuation discount to TOST's 52.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), FICO offers better value at 1.55x vs TRU's 5.91x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $617M | $825M | $17.0B | $26.2B | $14.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $940M | $687M | $15.7B | $29.1B | $18.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -7.16x | -26.81x | 52.43x | 42.57x | 31.44x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 28.32x | 20.80x | 23.69x | 26.43x | 15.28x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 1.55x | 5.91x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 42.22x | 31.01x | 12.83x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.36x | 2.39x | 2.77x | 13.16x | 3.08x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.73x | 2.58x | 8.39x | — | 3.16x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 24.94x | 27.99x | 34.03x | 21.27x |
Profitability & Efficiency
FICO leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
TOST delivers a 20.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $21 in annual profit, vs $-9 for PAR. TOST carries lower financial leverage with a 0.02x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to TRU's 1.13x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), TRU scores 8/9 vs PAR's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -9.1% | -8.4% | +20.7% | — | +15.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -5.5% | -6.3% | +13.8% | +39.8% | +6.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -4.2% | -22.2% | +30.8% | +59.7% | +7.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -5.1% | -7.6% | +15.9% | +78.5% | +8.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.49x | 0.08x | 0.02x | — | 1.13x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $323M | -$137M | -$1.3B | $2.9B | $4.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $80M | $162M | $1.4B | $134M | $854M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $402M | $25M | $40M | $3.1B | $5.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -21.71x | — | — | 7.20x | 3.61x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
FICO leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in FICO five years ago would be worth $22,769 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,856 for RSKD. Over the past 12 months, RSKD leads with a +2.0% total return vs PAR's -75.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors FICO at 15.3% vs PAR's -20.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -58.1% | +0.3% | -13.7% | -31.3% | -12.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -75.6% | +2.0% | -17.4% | -46.1% | -13.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -49.2% | +2.2% | +51.7% | +53.4% | +13.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -80.9% | -81.4% | -53.0% | +127.7% | -29.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +167.3% | -81.4% | -53.0% | +949.1% | +142.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -20.2% | +0.7% | +14.9% | +15.3% | +4.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — RSKD and FICO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FICO is the less volatile stock with a 0.86 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than PAR's 1.54 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. RSKD currently trades 84.9% from its 52-week high vs PAR's 20.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.54x | 1.05x | 1.44x | 0.86x | 1.36x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $72.15 | $5.68 | $49.66 | $2217.60 | $99.39 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $11.59 | $3.70 | $24.35 | $870.01 | $65.23 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +20.7% | +84.9% | +59.1% | +50.9% | +73.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 47.3 | 63.8 | 50.5 | 50.9 | 47.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.9M | 763K | 9.9M | 371K | 2.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — PAR and TRU each lead in 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: PAR as "Buy", RSKD as "Buy", TOST as "Buy", FICO as "Buy", TRU as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 67.0% upside for PAR (target: $25) vs 19.2% for RSKD (target: $6). TRU is the only dividend payer here at 0.63% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $25.00 | $5.75 | $39.76 | $1649.11 | $94.88 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 11 | 11 | 29 | 18 | 26 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | +0.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — | — | 0 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | $0.46 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.1% | +12.9% | +0.6% | +5.4% | +2.4% |
FICO leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). TRU leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
PAR vs RSKD vs TOST vs FICO vs TRU: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is PAR or RSKD or TOST or FICO or TRU a better buy right now?
For growth investors, PAR Technology Corporation (PAR) is the stronger pick with 30.
2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 2% for Riskified Ltd. (RSKD). TransUnion (TRU) offers the better valuation at 31. 4x trailing P/E (15. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate PAR Technology Corporation (PAR) a "Buy" — based on 11 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 — PAR or RSKD or TOST or FICO or TRU?
On trailing P/E, TransUnion (TRU) is the cheapest at 31.
4x versus Toast, Inc. at 52. 4x. On forward P/E, TransUnion is actually cheaper at 15. 3x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Fair Isaac Corporation wins at 0. 96x versus TransUnion's 2. 87x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — PAR or RSKD or TOST or FICO or TRU?
Over the past 5 years, Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO) delivered a total return of +127.
7%, compared to -81. 4% for Riskified Ltd. (RSKD). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FICO returned +949. 1% versus RSKD's -81. 4%. 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 — PAR or RSKD or TOST or FICO or TRU?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
86β versus PAR Technology Corporation's 1. 54β — meaning PAR is approximately 80% more volatile than FICO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Toast, Inc. (TOST) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 113% for TransUnion — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — PAR or RSKD or TOST or FICO or TRU?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), PAR Technology Corporation (PAR) is pulling ahead at 30.
2% versus 5. 2% for Riskified Ltd. (RSKD). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Toast, Inc. grew EPS 1639% year-over-year, compared to -1392. 9% for PAR Technology Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, TOST leads at 31. 1% 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 — PAR or RSKD or TOST or FICO or TRU?
Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO) is the more profitable company, earning 32.
7% net margin versus -18. 5% for PAR Technology Corporation — meaning it keeps 32. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FICO leads at 46. 5% versus -14. 0% for PAR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FICO leads at 82. 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 PAR or RSKD or TOST or FICO or TRU 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, Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 96x versus TransUnion's 2. 87x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, TransUnion (TRU) trades at 15. 3x forward P/E versus 28. 3x for PAR Technology Corporation — 13. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PAR: 67. 0% to $25. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — PAR or RSKD or TOST or FICO or TRU?
In this comparison, TRU (0.
6% yield) pays a dividend. PAR, RSKD, TOST, FICO do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is PAR or RSKD or TOST or FICO or TRU better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
86), +949. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FICO: +949. 1%, TOST: -53. 0%), 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 PAR and RSKD and TOST and FICO and TRU?
These companies operate in different sectors (PAR (Technology) and RSKD (Technology) and TOST (Technology) and FICO (Technology) and TRU (Industrials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: PAR is a small-cap high-growth stock; RSKD is a small-cap quality compounder stock; TOST is a mid-cap high-growth stock; FICO is a mid-cap high-growth stock; TRU is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. TRU pays a dividend while PAR, RSKD, TOST, FICO 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.