Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. FCN scored 71.1, VRSK scored 66.7 — FCN leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. FCN's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but VRSK's are as of March 2026 — a 3-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
FCN
FTI Consulting, Inc.
Consulting Services · Quality-Growth
71.1
$137.89 · $3.8B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
4.4
FCN leads
VRSK
Verisk Analytics, Inc.
Consulting Services · Quality-Growth
66.7
$176.65 · $23.0B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestFCN16.6x
Fastest growthFCN+7.1%
Highest qualityVRSK91 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueFCN-36%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
FCN
stronger →← stronger
VRSK
69
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
91
67
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
62
78
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
52
FCN is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
FCN
VRSK
$359mC
FCF
$1.1bC+
+7.1%B
Rev
+5.9%C+
0.95C+
D/E
Negative equity
16.6xA-
P/E
27.1xB
0.96B+
PEG
1.49B
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
FCN
VRSK
36% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
2% below
~-4%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~5%/yr
+47%
1-yr DCF upside
-2%
+57%
5-yr DCF upside
+2%
+73%
10-yr DCF upside
+7%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
FCN
Why this score
Buying back stock
VRSK
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
Durable high returns
The companies
FCNFTI Consulting, Inc.
Consulting Services · $137.89 · beta -0.06
Why now
Consulting Services · market cap $3.8b. Down 27% from 52-week high of $189.30 — deep drawdown territory. PEG 0.96 — paying under fair value for the growth rate.
Moat
ROE 19% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 142% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Value re-rating depends on a catalyst. Without one — analyst day, divestiture, margin recovery, capital return — the stock can stay cheap on these multiples for years.
VRSKVerisk Analytics, Inc.
Consulting Services · $176.65 · beta 0.69
Why now
Consulting Services · market cap $23.0b. Down 28% from 52-week high of $245.69 — deep drawdown territory. 17 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $230.94 (implying +31% upside).
Moat
Net margin 29% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. FCF converts 124% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Mature compounder — the risk is paying up for quality at a moment when growth is decelerating. Watch for sequential revenue + margin trends; the inflection from "compounder" to "ex-compounder" is hard to spot until the multiple already started compressing.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
FCN leads VRSK by 2.2 points (75.5 to 73.3), its sharpest advantage coming in Rev (grade B). A contrarian could still prefer VRSK, which trades about 8% below our DCF fair value — a margin of safety the score doesn't reward. Note they play different roles — FCN screens as value, VRSK screens as growth — so the model rewards different traits for each.
Our AI analyst is busy right now, so this verdict is drawn directly from the pillars, grades and DCF above.
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where FCN and VRSK diverge
On the headline score the gap is 4.4 points in favor of FCN. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
ValueFCN 78.2 · VRSK 52.2FCN +26.0
QualityFCN 68.8 · VRSK 91.2VRSK +22.4
GrowthFCN 66.9 · VRSK 62.2FCN +4.7
Pillars run 0–100. Value is judged against each company's own sector, so a Value score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.
Common questions
Is FCN or VRSK the better stock?
FCN scores higher: FCN 71.1, VRSK 66.7 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
Where do FCN and VRSK differ most?
The widest gap is value, where FCN leads by 26 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. Neither name sweeps: they trade the lead across the three pillars, so the comparison is a trade-off rather than one being better on every measure.
How are FCN and VRSK scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.