FICO looks fairly cheap given how sticky its scores are: lenders have little reason to switch to VantageScore over something they have history with, since the score's cost is tiny relative to bad debt on a loan. A replying post counters that FICO must fight the VantageScore adoption trend after pricing-power abuse drew the administration's ire, leaving open where earnings power settles. x.com  x.com 

Fair Isaac's moat has narrowed but not disappeared, so the selloff over VantageScore may be an opportunity. FHFA Director Bill Pulte let all Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac lenders use VantageScore 4.0, ending FICO's effective mortgage monopoly, and floated a cheaper bi-merge model. That brings a lower-cost rival and threatens pricing power. But FICO is deeply embedded in lender systems, underwriting, securitizations and decades of data. It works only if valuation leaves a margin of safety. x.com 

Fair Isaac's moat is eroding as mortgage lenders gain a cheaper alternative on equal terms. Per Wall St Engine, FHFA said Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will move to one pricing grid that puts VantageScore alongside Classic FICO, removing VantageScore's 20-point disadvantage so its borrowers also reach the top band at 780+. VantageScore costs about $0.99 per score versus roughly $10 for FICO. x.com 

The shift to bi-merge credit reports may not shrink Fair Isaac's profit pool: it makes pulling both scores more economical for lenders, and credit-file gaming could shift more economics to FICO as it moves to alternative pricing. FICO can earn the same whether its score is used upfront or later in origination; what matters is how many funded loans avoid FICO entirely and what it earns on retained usage. x.com  x.com 

S&P Global's moat may be weaker than its ratings pricing power suggests, and its gross profit dollars are likely to come under pressure as AI does more of the work, even if margins rise. FICO and the credit bureaus once looked just as required and oligopolistic until Vantage, with regulatory help, built a better product and upended pricing. The market is skeptical of historical data resale, as with CoStar and Verisk; the index business looks durable. x.com 

Fair Isaac's moat has shrunk to a puddle after one pricing-grid change. Per @wallstengine, FHFA said Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will move to one mortgage pricing grid that puts VantageScore alongside Classic FICO, with VantageScore borrowers reaching the top band at 780+, the same as FICO, giving lenders a cheaper alternative on the same framework. The shares fell 18%. x.com 

Fair Isaac looks insanely cheap at its lowest P/E in well over a decade, with fundamentals that still look beautiful. Per @stock_analysisx, the derating follows the US government's move to end FICO's mortgage scoring monopoly, leaving the stock at its lowest P/E since 2013. x.com  x.com 

FICO's data moat should widen against VantageScore as it leverages AI, making it an easy decision. Fair Isaac holds about 130 AI patents, per its earnings report. @VJNCapital argues the thesis rests on pricing: a few dollars for a score matter little against a $300k-$500k mortgage, and what counts is how accurately each model predicts default risk; decades of model iterations should be hard to compete against. x.com  x.com 

Pulte's move to treat VantageScore on par with FICO loosens how mortgage credit is priced rather than making homes more affordable. Pulte claims it saves $1,600 per Rocket closing, yet the score fee gap is about $9; the real change is VantageScore 4.0 running up to 20 points higher. That may push home prices up. VantageScore was never tested through the financial crisis or for negative convexity, which MBS buyers must know, so they are expected to push back. x.com  x.com  x.com 

FICO is trading at its lowest valuation of the decade, about 13x forward earnings for what is essentially a duopoly, which is attractive. @thejmkane counters that it is no longer really a monopoly, but a duopoly at 13x is not so bad. x.com  x.com