Information Technology Services
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
NIQ vs CSGP vs VRSK vs ICE vs JPM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Real Estate - Services
Consulting Services
Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges
Banks - Diversified
NIQ vs CSGP vs VRSK vs ICE vs JPM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Information Technology Services | Real Estate - Services | Consulting Services | Financial - Data & Stock Exchanges | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $2.44B | $13.92B | $24.08B | $79.60B | $896.00B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $4.31B | $3.41B | $3.10B | $12.64B | $280.33B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-335M | $25M | $910M | $3.30B | $57.05B |
| Gross Margin | 52.2% | 77.4% | 67.4% | 61.9% | 60.0% |
| Operating Margin | 4.3% | -0.8% | 44.9% | 38.7% | 25.9% |
| Forward P/E | 8.5x | 24.1x | 24.0x | 17.3x | 14.4x |
| Total Debt | $3.87B | $1.14B | $5.04B | $20.28B | $942.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $519M | $1.73B | $2.18B | $837M | $343.34B |
NIQ vs CSGP vs VRSK vs ICE vs JPM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jul 25 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| NIQ Global Intellig… (NIQ) | 100 | 44.8 | -55.2% |
| CoStar Group, Inc. (CSGP) | 100 | 34.5 | -65.5% |
| Verisk Analytics, I… (VRSK) | 100 | 65.9 | -34.1% |
| Intercontinental Ex… (ICE) | 100 | 76.0 | -24.0% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 108.3 | +8.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NIQ vs CSGP vs VRSK vs ICE vs JPM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NIQ is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 5.7%, EPS growth 60.1%, 3Y rev CAGR 14.6%
CSGP ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.47, Low D/E 13.7%, current ratio 2.84x
- 18.7% FFO/revenue growth vs JPM's 3.3%
VRSK is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and efficiency is your priority.
- 29.3% margin vs NIQ's -7.8%
- 16.7% ROA vs NIQ's -4.9%, ROIC 33.0% vs 2.3%
ICE is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 13 yrs, beta 0.35, yield 1.4%
- Beta 0.35, yield 1.4%, current ratio 1.02x
- Beta 0.35 vs JPM's 0.94, lower leverage
JPM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 465.8% 10Y total return vs ICE's 195.3%
- PEG 0.81 vs VRSK's 2.82
- Lower P/E (14.4x vs 17.3x), PEG 0.81 vs 1.95
- 1.9% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs VRSK's 1.0%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 18.7% FFO/revenue growth vs JPM's 3.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.4x vs 17.3x), PEG 0.81 vs 1.95 | |
| Quality / Margins | 29.3% margin vs NIQ's -7.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.35 vs JPM's 0.94, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.9% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs VRSK's 1.0%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +21.8% vs CSGP's -60.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 16.7% ROA vs NIQ's -4.9%, ROIC 33.0% vs 2.3% |
NIQ vs CSGP vs VRSK vs ICE vs JPM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
NIQ vs CSGP vs VRSK vs ICE vs JPM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories
NIQ leads 1 • VRSK leads 1 • CSGP leads 0 • ICE leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — CSGP and VRSK each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM is the larger business by revenue, generating $280.3B annually — 90.4x VRSK's $3.1B. VRSK is the more profitable business, keeping 29.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NIQ's -7.8%. On growth, CSGP holds the edge at +22.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $4.3B | $3.4B | $3.1B | $12.6B | $280.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $825M | $278M | $1.7B | $6.5B | $81.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$335M | $25M | $910M | $3.3B | $57.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $115M | $241M | $1.1B | $4.3B | $100.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +52.2% | +77.4% | +67.4% | +61.9% | +60.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +4.3% | -0.8% | +44.9% | +38.7% | +25.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -7.8% | +0.7% | +29.3% | +26.1% | +20.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +2.7% | +7.1% | +36.3% | +33.9% | +36.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +11.1% | +22.5% | +3.9% | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +36.7% | +127.7% | +4.8% | +23.1% | +16.0% |
Valuation Metrics
NIQ leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 16.0x trailing earnings, JPM trades at a 99% valuation discount to CSGP's 1978.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), JPM offers better value at 0.90x vs VRSK's 3.32x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.4B | $13.9B | $24.1B | $79.6B | $896.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $5.8B | $13.3B | $26.9B | $99.0B | $1.50T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -6.27x | 1978.31x | 28.32x | 24.36x | 16.00x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 8.48x | 24.11x | 24.03x | 17.34x | 14.40x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 3.32x | 2.74x | 0.90x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 7.49x | 78.41x | 16.05x | 15.34x | 18.36x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.58x | 4.29x | 7.84x | 6.30x | 3.20x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.80x | 1.66x | 82.53x | 2.77x | 2.47x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 102.12x | 339.47x | 20.20x | 18.56x | 8.88x |
Profitability & Efficiency
VRSK leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
VRSK delivers a 4.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $4 in annual profit, vs $-42 for NIQ. CSGP carries lower financial leverage with a 0.14x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to VRSK's 16.26x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ICE scores 9/9 vs JPM's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -41.9% | +0.3% | +4.4% | +11.6% | +15.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -4.9% | +0.2% | +16.7% | +2.3% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +2.3% | -0.9% | +33.0% | +7.5% | +4.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +2.7% | -0.8% | +39.6% | +9.5% | +8.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 3.16x | 0.14x | 16.26x | 0.70x | 2.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $3.4B | -$589M | $2.9B | $19.4B | $599.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $519M | $1.7B | $2.2B | $837M | $343.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $3.9B | $1.1B | $5.0B | $20.3B | $942.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.59x | 1.58x | 7.87x | 6.53x | 0.74x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
JPM leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in JPM five years ago would be worth $21,820 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,733 for CSGP. Over the past 12 months, JPM leads with a +21.8% total return vs CSGP's -60.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors JPM at 33.6% vs CSGP's -25.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -47.6% | -50.0% | -16.6% | -11.8% | -0.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -56.5% | -60.1% | -40.9% | -20.4% | +21.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -56.5% | -59.3% | -13.9% | +34.6% | +138.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -56.5% | -62.7% | +10.3% | +30.9% | +118.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -56.5% | +57.2% | +144.6% | +195.3% | +465.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -24.2% | -25.9% | -4.9% | +10.4% | +33.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — VRSK and JPM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
VRSK is the less volatile stock with a -0.15 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than JPM's 0.94 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. JPM currently trades 95.1% from its 52-week high vs CSGP's 33.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.85x | 0.47x | -0.15x | 0.35x | 0.94x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $20.39 | $97.43 | $314.80 | $189.35 | $337.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $7.93 | $31.36 | $156.00 | $136.67 | $262.71 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +40.6% | +33.7% | +58.4% | +74.2% | +95.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 37.4 | 40.8 | 57.0 | 31.9 | 59.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.4M | 6.8M | 1.9M | 3.2M | 7.0M |
Analyst Outlook
JPM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NIQ as "Buy", CSGP as "Buy", VRSK as "Hold", ICE as "Buy", JPM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 86.3% upside for CSGP (target: $61) vs 5.9% for JPM (target: $340). For income investors, JPM offers the higher dividend yield at 1.86% vs VRSK's 0.98%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $14.40 | $61.18 | $231.25 | $194.00 | $339.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 7 | 25 | 25 | 36 | 61 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +1.0% | +1.4% | +1.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — | 7 | 13 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $1.81 | $1.93 | $5.95 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +4.1% | +2.6% | +1.7% | +3.9% |
JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories (Total Returns, Analyst Outlook). NIQ leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
NIQ vs CSGP vs VRSK vs ICE vs JPM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NIQ or CSGP or VRSK or ICE or JPM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, CoStar Group, Inc.
(CSGP) is the stronger pick with 18. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM). JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) offers the better valuation at 16. 0x trailing P/E (14. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate NIQ Global Intelligence Plc (NIQ) a "Buy" — based on 7 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 — NIQ or CSGP or VRSK or ICE or JPM?
On trailing P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the cheapest at 16. 0x versus CoStar Group, Inc. at 1978. 3x. On forward P/E, NIQ Global Intelligence Plc is actually cheaper at 8. 5x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: JPMorgan Chase & Co. wins at 0. 81x versus Verisk Analytics, Inc. 's 2. 82x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NIQ or CSGP or VRSK or ICE or JPM?
Over the past 5 years, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) delivered a total return of +118. 2%, compared to -62. 7% for CoStar Group, Inc. (CSGP). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +465. 8% versus NIQ's -56. 5%. 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 — NIQ or CSGP or VRSK or ICE or JPM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Verisk Analytics, Inc.
(VRSK) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 15β versus JPMorgan Chase & Co. 's 0. 94β — meaning JPM is approximately -734% more volatile than VRSK relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, CoStar Group, Inc. (CSGP) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 14% versus 16% for Verisk Analytics, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NIQ or CSGP or VRSK or ICE or JPM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), CoStar Group, Inc.
(CSGP) is pulling ahead at 18. 7% versus 3. 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: NIQ Global Intelligence Plc grew EPS 60. 1% year-over-year, compared to -95. 1% for CoStar Group, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, NIQ leads at 14. 6% 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 — NIQ or CSGP or VRSK or ICE or JPM?
Verisk Analytics, Inc.
(VRSK) is the more profitable company, earning 29. 6% net margin versus -8. 4% for NIQ Global Intelligence Plc — meaning it keeps 29. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: VRSK leads at 44. 6% versus -2. 2% for CSGP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CSGP leads at 75. 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 NIQ or CSGP or VRSK or ICE or JPM 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, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 81x versus Verisk Analytics, Inc. 's 2. 82x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, NIQ Global Intelligence Plc (NIQ) trades at 8. 5x forward P/E versus 24. 1x for CoStar Group, Inc. — 15. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CSGP: 86. 3% to $61. 18.
08Which pays a better dividend — NIQ or CSGP or VRSK or ICE or JPM?
In this comparison, JPM (1.
9% yield), ICE (1. 4% yield), VRSK (1. 0% yield) pay a dividend. NIQ, CSGP do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is NIQ or CSGP or VRSK or ICE or JPM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Verisk Analytics, Inc.
(VRSK) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 15), 1. 0% yield, +144. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (VRSK: +144. 6%, NIQ: -56. 5%), 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 NIQ and CSGP and VRSK and ICE and JPM?
These companies operate in different sectors (NIQ (Technology) and CSGP (Real Estate) and VRSK (Industrials) and ICE (Financial Services) and JPM (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: NIQ is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CSGP is a mid-cap high-growth stock; VRSK is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; ICE is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock. VRSK, ICE, JPM pay a dividend while NIQ, CSGP 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.