TRU vs MCO

For growth investors, TransUnion (TRU) is the stronger pick with 9.

4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 8. 9% for Moody's Corporation (MCO). 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 Moody's Corporation at 32. 8x. 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: TransUnion wins at 2. 78x versus Moody's Corporation's 3. 44x.

Over the past 5 years, Moody's Corporation (MCO) delivered a total return of +40.

9%, compared to -30. 7% for TransUnion (TRU). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MCO returned +401. 6% 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), Moody's Corporation (MCO) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

86β versus TransUnion's 1. 36β — meaning TRU is approximately 58% more volatile than MCO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, TransUnion (TRU) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 113% versus 175% for Moody's Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), TransUnion (TRU) is pulling ahead at 9.

4% versus 8. 9% for Moody's Corporation (MCO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: TransUnion grew EPS 60. 0% year-over-year, compared to 21. 4% for Moody's 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.

Moody's Corporation (MCO) is the more profitable company, earning 31.

9% net margin versus 10. 0% for TransUnion — meaning it keeps 31. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MCO leads at 44. 8% versus 18. 7% for TRU. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MCO leads at 68. 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, TransUnion (TRU) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 2. 78x versus Moody's Corporation's 3. 44x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, TransUnion (TRU) trades at 14. 8x forward P/E versus 26. 9x for Moody's Corporation — 12. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for TRU: 34. 2% to $94. 88.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

Moody's Corporation (MCO) offers the highest yield at 0. 9%, versus 0. 7% for TransUnion (TRU).

For long-horizon retirement investors, Moody's Corporation (MCO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

86), 0. 9% yield, +401. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MCO: +401. 6%, 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 MCO (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

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.