MetaCap

Fair Isaac (FICO) vs Global Payments (GPN)

Head-to-head comparison of performance, valuation, growth, profitability and dividends. Prices delayed 15 minutes; data as of Oct 8, 2026.

Summary

Global Payments (GPN) has outperformed Fair Isaac (FICO) over the past year, losing 8.0% versus a loss of 63.7%. Over five years, FICO leads with a +66.4% price change compared with -49.5% for GPN. Global Payments is the larger company by market cap ($21.32 billion vs $15.19 billion), about 1.4 times the size, while Fair Isaac is growing revenue faster (+15.9% vs -0.4%).

On valuation, Global Payments trades at a lower forward P/E (5.0x vs 14.0x for Fair Isaac). Global Payments pays a dividend yielding 1.24%, while Fair Isaac does not currently pay one. Fair Isaac converts more of its revenue into profit, with a net margin of 32.7% versus 18.2%.

Summary generated from market data by MetaCap's automated system. Methodology

Relative performance

FICO-63.73%GPN-7.97%
+11%-30%-72%
Oct 7, 20251 yearOct 7, 2026
FICO+70.03%GPN-49.13%
+520%+216%-87%
Oct 4, 20215 yearsOct 5, 2026

Percent change in share price from the first common trading day shown; excludes dividends.

Head-to-head

FICO versus GPN key metrics
MetricFICOGPN
Share price$703.50$80.58
Market cap$15.19B$21.32B
1-day change+3.19%-0.62%
YTD return-59.67%+4.75%
1-year return-63.73%-7.97%
5-year return+66.37%-49.51%
P/E ratio (TTM)20.3737.83
Forward P/E14.015.03
EPS (TTM)$34.54$2.13
Dividend yield0.00%1.24%
Annual dividend$0.00$1.00
Revenue (latest FY)$1.99B$7.71B
Revenue growth (YoY)+15.91%-0.39%
Net income (latest FY)$651.95M$1.40B
Gross margin82.23%72.57%
Operating margin46.45%22.77%
Net margin32.75%18.17%
52-week high$1,858.91$95.88
52-week low$586.05$61.16
Distance from 52-week high-62.16%-15.96%
Analyst consensusbuybuy
Avg. price target upside+58.87%+30.31%
Average volume567.27K2.79M
Shares outstanding21.60M264.62M
Employees3,87626,000
SectorConsumer DiscretionaryConsumer Discretionary
IndustryBusiness ServicesBusiness Services

Highlighted cells mark the higher value for growth, returns, margins and yield, and the lower value for P/E ratios. Highlighting is a mechanical comparison, not a recommendation.

Key differences

  • GPN has outperformed FICO by 55.8 percentage points over the past year.
  • Global Payments trades at a higher earnings multiple (37.8x vs 20.4x trailing P/E).
  • Global Payments offers a meaningfully higher dividend yield (1.24% vs 0.00%).
  • Fair Isaac is more profitable, keeping 32.7 cents of every revenue dollar as net income versus 18.2 cents for Global Payments.
  • Fair Isaac grew revenue faster in its latest fiscal year (+15.91% vs -0.39%).

About Fair Isaac

FICO stock →

Fair Isaac Corporation provides analytics software in the Americas, Europe, the Middle East, Africa, and the Asia Pacific. It operates through two segments, Scores and Software.

Consumer Discretionary · Business Services · 3,876 employees

About Global Payments

GPN stock →

Global Payments Inc. provides payment technology and software solutions for card, check, and digital-based payments in the Americas, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific.

Consumer Discretionary · Business Services · 26,000 employees

FICO vs GPN FAQ

Which is bigger, Fair Isaac or Global Payments?

Global Payments (GPN) is larger, with a market capitalization of $21.32B compared with $15.19B for Fair Isaac (FICO).

Which stock has performed better over the past year, FICO or GPN?

GPN returned -7.97% over the past 12 months, compared with -63.73% for FICO (price return, excluding dividends). Past performance does not predict future results.

Which has the lower P/E ratio, FICO or GPN?

FICO has the lower trailing P/E at 20.4, versus 37.8 for GPN. A lower P/E is not by itself a sign of a better investment; it can reflect slower expected growth or higher risk.

Which pays a higher dividend, Fair Isaac or Global Payments?

Global Payments pays a dividend yielding 1.24%, while Fair Isaac does not currently pay a regular dividend.

Are Fair Isaac and Global Payments in the same industry?

Yes. Both are classified in the Business Services industry within the Consumer Discretionary sector.

More comparisons