TRU vs FICO

For growth investors, Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO) is the stronger pick with 15.

9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 9. 4% for TransUnion (TRU). TransUnion (TRU) offers the better valuation at 30. 5x trailing P/E (14. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate TransUnion (TRU) a "Buy" — based on 26 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, TransUnion (TRU) is the cheapest at 30.

5x versus Fair Isaac Corporation at 40. 2x. On forward P/E, TransUnion is actually cheaper at 14. 8x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Fair Isaac Corporation wins at 0. 91x versus TransUnion's 2. 78x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO) delivered a total return of +115.

9%, compared to -30. 7% for TransUnion (TRU). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FICO returned +906. 5% versus TRU's +142. 8%. 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), Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

86β versus TransUnion's 1. 36β — meaning TRU is approximately 59% more volatile than FICO relative to the S&P 500.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO) is pulling ahead at 15.

9% versus 9. 4% for TransUnion (TRU). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: TransUnion grew EPS 60. 0% year-over-year, compared to 29. 8% for Fair Isaac Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, FICO leads at 13. 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.

Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO) is the more profitable company, earning 32.

7% net margin versus 10. 0% for TransUnion — 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 18. 7% for TRU. 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.

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. 91x versus TransUnion's 2. 78x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, TransUnion (TRU) trades at 14. 8x forward P/E versus 25. 0x for Fair Isaac Corporation — 10. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FICO: 54. 6% to $1649. 11.

In this comparison, TRU (0.

7% yield) pays a dividend. FICO does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

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), +906. 5% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FICO: +906. 5%, TRU: +142. 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.

These companies operate in different sectors (TRU (Industrials) and FICO (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: TRU is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; FICO is a mid-cap high-growth stock. TRU pays a dividend while FICO does 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.