FCN vs. VRSK

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about FTI Consulting, Inc. (FCN) and Verisk Analytics, Inc. (VRSK).

Performance

FCN vs. VRSK - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FTI Consulting, Inc. (FCN) and Verisk Analytics, Inc. (VRSK). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

FCN vs. VRSK - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FCN FTI Consulting, Inc.	4.62%	-10.62%	-4.03%	25.41%	3.51%	37.33%	0.96%	66.06%	55.12%	-4.70%
VRSK Verisk Analytics, Inc.	-17.76%	-18.23%	16.00%	36.24%	-22.33%	10.85%	39.89%	37.92%	13.58%	18.27%

Fundamentals

EPS FCN : $12.42 VRSK : $6.50
PE Ratio FCN : 14.39 VRSK : 28.24
PEG Ratio FCN : 3.13 VRSK : 1.59
PS Ratio FCN : 1.03 VRSK : 33.39
Total Revenue (TTM) FCN : $3.79B VRSK : $768.30M
Gross Profit (TTM) FCN : $1.22B VRSK : $538.80M
EBITDA (TTM) FCN : $389.08M VRSK : $1.42B

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FCN achieves a 4.62% return, which is significantly higher than VRSK's -17.76% return. Over the past 10 years, FCN has outperformed VRSK with an annualized return of 17.50%, while VRSK has yielded a comparatively lower 9.15% annualized return.

FCN

• 1D: 1.10%
• 1M: 8.99%
• YTD: 4.62%
• 6M: 10.97%
• 1Y: 8.90%
• 3Y*: -3.25%
• 5Y*: 4.68%
• 10Y*: 17.50%

VRSK

• 1D: -3.29%
• 1M: -14.35%
• YTD: -17.76%
• 6M: -26.13%
• 1Y: -38.07%
• 3Y*: -0.83%
• 5Y*: 1.07%
• 10Y*: 9.15%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Return for Risk

FCN vs. VRSK — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

FCN

FCN Risk / Return Rank: 51
FCN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
FCN Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
FCN Omega Ratio Rank: 45
FCN Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
FCN Martin Ratio Rank: 56

VRSK

VRSK Risk / Return Rank: 6
VRSK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
VRSK Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
VRSK Omega Ratio Rank: 3
VRSK Calmar Ratio Rank: 12
VRSK Martin Ratio Rank: 8

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

FCN vs. VRSK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FTI Consulting, Inc. (FCN) and Verisk Analytics, Inc. (VRSK). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	FCN	VRSK	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.35	-1.29	+1.64
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.66	-1.78	+2.44
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	0.76	+0.33
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.60	-0.81	+1.41
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	1.54	-1.51	+3.05
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FCN vs. VRSK - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCN Sharpe Ratio is 0.35, which is higher than the VRSK Sharpe Ratio of -1.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCN and VRSK, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FCN	VRSK	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.35	-1.29	+1.64
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.17	0.05	+0.12
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.57	0.39	+0.18
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.30	0.56	-0.26

Correlation

The correlation between FCN and VRSK is 0.33, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

FCN vs. VRSK - Dividend Comparison

FCN has not paid dividends to shareholders, while VRSK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.01%.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
FCN FTI Consulting, Inc.	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
VRSK Verisk Analytics, Inc.	1.01%	0.80%	0.57%	0.57%	0.70%	0.51%	0.52%	0.67%

Drawdowns

FCN vs. VRSK - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCN drawdown since its inception was -88.02%, which is greater than VRSK's maximum drawdown of -46.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCN and VRSK.

Drawdown Indicators

	FCN	VRSK	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-88.02%	-46.98%	-41.04%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.82%	-46.98%	+32.16%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.34%	-46.98%	+12.64%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.34%	-46.98%	+12.64%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-22.63%	-42.45%	+19.82%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-30.31%	-6.79%	-23.52%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.79%	25.01%	-19.22%

Volatility

FCN vs. VRSK - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FTI Consulting, Inc. (FCN) is 6.77%, while Verisk Analytics, Inc. (VRSK) has a volatility of 9.42%. This indicates that FCN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VRSK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FCN	VRSK	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.77%	9.42%	-2.65%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.38%	24.77%	-4.39%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.25%	29.61%	-4.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.48%	23.67%	+4.81%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.63%	23.53%	+7.10%

Financials

FCN vs. VRSK - Profitability Comparison

The chart below illustrates the profitability comparison between FTI Consulting, Inc. and Verisk Analytics, Inc. over time, highlighting three key metrics: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Margin, and Net Profit Margin.

FCN - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, FTI Consulting, Inc. reported a gross profit of 307.67M and revenue of 990.75M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 31.1%.

VRSK - Gross Margin

Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Verisk Analytics, Inc. reported a gross profit of -1.07B and revenue of -1.53B. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 69.8%.

FCN - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, FTI Consulting, Inc. reported an operating income of 93.44M and revenue of 990.75M, resulting in an operating margin of 9.4%.

VRSK - Operating Margin

Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Verisk Analytics, Inc. reported an operating income of -684.40M and revenue of -1.53B, resulting in an operating margin of 44.9%.

FCN - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, FTI Consulting, Inc. reported a net income of 54.53M and revenue of 990.75M, resulting in a net margin of 5.5%.

VRSK - Net Margin

Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Apr 2026, Verisk Analytics, Inc. reported a net income of 197.20M and revenue of -1.53B, resulting in a net margin of -12.9%.