GrowthTurtle
Data Science PhD & IEEE Fellow, Ex-Two Sigma
FICO's pricing power should hold because lenders have hated its pricing forever and none of them ever actually leave, which makes Steve Eisman's short a brave bet. Eisman says FICO raised prices over 500% and angered everyone in lending. Switching costs are the moat, and if they actually crack, the stock would fall fast rather than slowly. x.com x.comÂ
Moody's and S&P Global could de-rate from high starting multiples if generalist portfolio managers come to see them as FICO 2.0. Their industry structures differ, but parallels in standards, pricing power and regulatory exposure could build a narrative that their pricing power is tapped out after the FICO case study, compressing multiples further. So far their de-rating has come from macro and AI pressure, not such fears. x.com x.com x.comÂ
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.comÂ
FICO is being disrupted, though not dying, and its moat is more fragile than it looks. Most banks' own scoring models are equal to or better than FICO's and are used alongside it. FICO's real moat is the level playing field its score gives the institutional and resale mortgage markets, so it is truly over for FICO if Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac switch to VantageScore. x.com x.com x.comÂ
Fair Isaac's selloff looks technically overdone and will probably push the company to double down on buybacks, making it a short-term bounce trade. The longer-term case is less compelling. x.com x.com x.comÂ
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.comÂ
FICO no longer merits ownership because its business model, once arguably the best in the world, has made too many enemies and may have gotten too greedy with pricing. x.comÂ
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.comÂ
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.comÂ
FICO's moat is starting to get disrupted, and the premium multiple holders once defended has not held up. Two years ago the stock traded at 80x EPS on the argument that a high-quality compounder with a moat deserved it; that multiple has since compressed by about 80%. FICO would need to rise 280% to regain its all-time high, and there is a good chance it never does. x.com x.com x.comÂ
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.comÂ
