Verisk Analytics, Inc. ranks near the peer group median, with valuation as the main structural support while growth remains the clearest constraint. The market setup has weakened, with clear trend damage and relative performance under pressure.
Peer-relative scores, weakest to strongest
Verisk Analytics is a US-based provider of data analytics and risk assessment solutions, primarily serving the insurance industry. The company generates the majority of its revenue from subscription-based services and has a global client base.
Verisk demonstrates strong profitability, with a 34.5% ROIC and a 44% operating margin, positioning it as a benchmark for capital efficiency and business quality. However, the company’s market confidence and trend profile remain under pressure: despite these fundamentals, a trend score of just 2/100 and a -48.5% max drawdown indicate that the market questions the durability of Verisk’s premium metrics. This divergence results in mixed valuation support, as strong earnings and capital returns have not led to sustained investor conviction.
Internally, the lack of momentum is evident—Verisk’s trend score is at the bottom of its peer group, and the maximum drawdown is significantly deeper than sector norms. The stability score, now at 52/100 and down from 63, indicates some decline in perceived reliability. Management’s confidence is reflected in an 11% dividend increase and a $2.5bn share repurchase authorization, both demonstrating capital return discipline. However, these shareholder-friendly actions have not fully offset market skepticism, as the weak trend and deep drawdown continue to influence sentiment.
Recent analyst upgrades and raised price targets, such as Raymond James’ $260 call, show external recognition of Verisk’s value and market position. This external context adds complexity: while positive broker sentiment supports the execution story, ongoing concerns about AI disruption—an overhang less pronounced for peers—continue to affect the stock. The resulting valuation reflects both the company’s strengths and the market’s unresolved concerns, with the sector backdrop providing only partial support.
Compared to peers like Rightmove or Autotrader, Verisk’s profitability and capital returns are among the highest, but its weak trend and pronounced drawdown are more severe than many. The AI disruption overhang is also partly specific to Verisk, affecting it more than its peer group. This places Verisk among companies with strong core business metrics but more significant confidence challenges.
A more positive outlook would require market confidence to stabilize and the trend score to improve. Continued delivery of capital returns without margin deterioration would further support improvement. Until then, Verisk appears as a quality franchise with valuation support under pressure.
Break down VRSK's position across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
This analysis is rule-based and descriptive. Peer-relative scores are derived from functional peer group comparisons using publicly available financial data. Scores reflect structural positioning only and do not constitute investment advice, a buy or sell recommendation, or a forecast of future performance. AssetNext peer scores are recalculated periodically as new data becomes available.
AssetNext scores reflect each company's structural position within its functional peer group — not a ranking against all stocks simultaneously. Peers are identified by similarity across eight financial dimensions, including revenue growth trajectory, margin structure, capital intensity, and earnings stability. A score of 75 means the company ranks in the top quartile within its own peer group, not the entire market.
Four dimension scores drive the overall peer score: Growth (revenue trajectory and expansion dynamics), Quality (margin structure and capital efficiency), Valuation (peer-relative pricing on standard multiples), and Stability (earnings consistency and financial predictability). Each dimension is scored 0–100 relative to the peer group, then combined into an overall peer score using equal weighting.
Because scores are peer-relative, the same company can have slightly different scores in different index universes. On comparison pages, both companies are shown within their shared peer universe wherever possible — so the scores are directly comparable. The peer basis is stated on each score card.
Scores are recalculated periodically as underlying financial data is updated. All analysis is descriptive and rule-based — AssetNext describes structural realities and never issues buy, sell or hold recommendations.