Home > Comparison > Financial Services > CBOE vs FDS
The strategic rivalry between Cboe Global Markets and FactSet Research Systems defines the trajectory of the financial data and stock exchanges sector. Cboe operates as a diversified options and equities exchange, leveraging a capital-intensive model with global reach. FactSet delivers high-margin, integrated financial analytics and data solutions, emphasizing technology-driven workflow efficiency. This analysis will assess which model offers superior risk-adjusted returns, guiding investors toward the optimal choice for a balanced portfolio.
Table of contents
Companies Overview
Cboe Global Markets and FactSet Research Systems shape critical segments of the financial data and exchange landscape.
Cboe Global Markets, Inc.: Leading Global Options Exchange
Cboe Global Markets dominates as a worldwide options exchange operator. Its revenue stems from five segments including Options, North American Equities, Futures, Europe and Asia Pacific, and Global FX. In 2026, Cboe’s strategic focus centers on expanding its global footprint and enhancing its product offerings across diverse asset classes to solidify market leadership.
FactSet Research Systems Inc.: Premier Financial Data & Analytics Provider
FactSet Research Systems excels as a provider of integrated financial information and analytics to global investment professionals. It generates revenue through its research, analytics, trading, content, and wealth workflow solutions. In 2026, FactSet prioritizes innovation in data integration and technology solutions to deepen client engagement and expand its global footprint.
Strategic Collision: Similarities & Divergences
Both companies thrive in financial services, yet Cboe emphasizes exchange-based transactional platforms, while FactSet focuses on analytics and workflow integration. Their primary battleground lies in serving the investment community’s evolving needs, blending data access with execution capabilities. Cboe appeals to investors favoring exchange-driven growth; FactSet attracts those valuing long-term analytics and technology innovation.
Income Statement Comparison
This data dissects the core profitability and scalability of both corporate engines to reveal who dominates the bottom line:
| Metric | Cboe Global Markets, Inc. (CBOE) | FactSet Research Systems Inc. (FDS) |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | 4.7B | 2.3B |
| Cost of Revenue | 2.4B | 1.1B |
| Operating Expenses | 723M | 476M |
| Gross Profit | 2.3B | 1.2B |
| EBITDA | 1.6B | 966M |
| EBIT | 1.5B | 777M |
| Interest Expense | 52M | 56M |
| Net Income | 1.1B | 597M |
| EPS | 10.46 | 15.74 |
| Fiscal Year | 2025 | 2025 |
Income Statement Analysis: The Bottom-Line Duel
This income statement comparison reveals the true operational efficiency and profitability momentum behind each company’s financial engine.
Cboe Global Markets, Inc. Analysis
Cboe’s revenue rose strongly from 3.5B in 2021 to 4.7B in 2025, more than a 34% increase, while net income surged 108% to 1.1B. Gross and net margins remain robust at 48.9% and 23.3%, respectively, highlighting disciplined cost control. In 2025, EBIT jumped 33%, signaling improving operational leverage and accelerating profitability.
FactSet Research Systems Inc. Analysis
FactSet’s revenue grew steadily by 46% over five years, reaching 2.3B in 2025. Net income increased 49% to 597M, with a gross margin of 52.7% and net margin of 25.7%, indicating strong profitability despite a smaller scale. The 2025 EBIT rose 8%, reflecting moderate momentum but stable margin expansion and disciplined expense management.
Scale and Margin: Cboe’s Growth Surge vs. FactSet’s Margin Discipline
Cboe leads with sharper revenue and net income growth, underpinned by expanding margins and operational efficiency. FactSet impresses with higher gross and net margins but delivers slower top-line and bottom-line growth. Investors valuing rapid profit expansion may favor Cboe’s profile, while those prioritizing consistent margin strength might prefer FactSet’s steady model.
Financial Ratios Comparison
These vital ratios act as a diagnostic tool to expose the underlying fiscal health, valuation premiums, and capital efficiency of the companies compared below:
| Ratios | Cboe Global Markets, Inc. (CBOE) | FactSet Research Systems Inc. (FDS) |
|---|---|---|
| ROE | 21.4% | 27.3% |
| ROIC | 15.3% | 16.1% |
| P/E | 23.9 | 23.7 |
| P/B | 5.11 | 6.48 |
| Current Ratio | 1.87 | 1.40 |
| Quick Ratio | 1.87 | 1.40 |
| D/E (Debt-to-Equity) | 0.33 | 0.71 |
| Debt-to-Assets | 18.1% | 36.2% |
| Interest Coverage | -28.95 (negative) | 13.29 |
| Asset Turnover | 0.51 | 0.54 |
| Fixed Asset Turnover | 19.3 | 11.2 |
| Payout Ratio | 25.7% | 26.8% |
| Dividend Yield | 1.08% | 1.13% |
| Fiscal Year | 2025 | 2025 |
Efficiency & Valuation Duel: The Vital Signs
Financial ratios act as a company’s DNA, exposing hidden risks and highlighting operational strengths critical for investment decisions.
Cboe Global Markets, Inc.
Cboe shows strong profitability with a 21.4% ROE and a robust 23.3% net margin, signaling operational efficiency. Its P/E ratio of 23.9 is neutral, though a high P/B of 5.11 suggests valuation stretch. The company returns value through a modest 1.08% dividend yield, reflecting balanced shareholder distributions.
FactSet Research Systems Inc.
FactSet delivers superior profitability, boasting a 27.3% ROE and a 25.7% net margin, indicating exceptional efficiency. Its P/E of 23.7 remains neutral, but a higher P/B at 6.48 flags valuation risk. Dividend yield stands at 1.13%, maintaining shareholder returns alongside reinvestment in R&D for growth.
Premium Valuation vs. Operational Safety
FactSet commands higher profitability but carries greater valuation risk with its stretched P/B ratio. Cboe balances strong returns with a more conservative valuation profile. Investors seeking operational safety may prefer Cboe, while those prioritizing growth might lean toward FactSet’s aggressive performance.
Which one offers the Superior Shareholder Reward?
I see Cboe Global Markets (CBOE) and FactSet Research Systems (FDS) both pay dividends, but their approaches differ. CBOE yields ~1.08% with a payout ratio near 26%, well-covered by steady free cash flow. It pairs dividends with active buybacks, enhancing total returns sustainably. FDS offers a slightly lower yield (~1.13%) and a 27% payout ratio, but it reinvests more aggressively in R&D and growth, with robust free cash flow supporting buybacks too. Historically in financial data services, FDS’s reinvestment fuels long-term moat expansion, while CBOE’s balanced distribution suits income-focused investors. I judge CBOE’s model more sustainable for consistent shareholder reward in 2026, offering a superior total return profile amid market cycles.
Comparative Score Analysis: The Strategic Profile
The radar chart reveals the fundamental DNA and trade-offs of both firms, highlighting their core financial strengths and weaknesses:
FactSet Research Systems leads with a stronger overall score (4 vs. 3) and excels in discounted cash flow, signaling superior valuation models. Both firms share top marks in ROE and ROA, reflecting efficient asset utilization. Cboe Global Markets shows a more moderate debt-to-equity profile (3 vs. 2), indicating slightly better leverage management. However, both suffer from weak valuation scores (P/E and P/B), though Cboe’s are notably poorer. FactSet’s profile appears more balanced, while Cboe relies heavily on operational efficiency rather than valuation appeal.
Bankruptcy Risk: Solvency Showdown
FactSet’s Altman Z-Score of 4.49 and Cboe’s 5.98 both place them in the safe zone, indicating strong long-term solvency amid current market cycles:
Financial Health: Quality of Operations
Cboe scores a robust 7 on the Piotroski F-Score, outperforming FactSet’s 6, signaling stronger internal financial health and fewer red flags in operational metrics:
How are the two companies positioned?
This section dissects the operational DNA of CBOE and FDS by comparing their revenue distribution by segment alongside internal strengths and weaknesses. The goal: confront their economic moats to identify which model delivers the most resilient, sustainable competitive advantage today.
Revenue Segmentation: The Strategic Mix
This visual comparison dissects how Cboe Global Markets and FactSet Research Systems diversify their income streams and where their primary sector bets lie:
Cboe Global Markets anchors revenue in Transaction and Clearing Fees at $2.9B, dwarfing other segments like Regulatory Fees ($426M) and Market Data Fees ($295M). This concentration highlights its dominance in infrastructure and market operations. In contrast, FactSet’s limited data shows a split between U.S. ($498M) and U.K. ($105M) revenues, suggesting geographic diversification but less product segmentation. Cboe’s focus risks concentration, while FactSet pivots on regional balance.
Strengths and Weaknesses Comparison
This table compares the Strengths and Weaknesses of Cboe Global Markets, Inc. and FactSet Research Systems Inc.:
Cboe Strengths
- Favorable net margin, ROE, and ROIC indicating strong profitability
- Low debt-to-assets ratio supports financial stability
- High fixed asset turnover shows efficient asset use
- Current and quick ratios above 1.8 suggest good liquidity
FactSet Strengths
- Highest net margin and ROE among peers indicating superior profitability
- Favorable ROIC and interest coverage demonstrate sound capital efficiency and debt management
- Global presence with significant revenues in US, UK, and Europe
- Solid quick ratio and dividend yield support financial health
Cboe Weaknesses
- Unfavorable interest coverage ratio signals potential risk servicing debt
- Unfavorable price-to-book ratio may reflect valuation concerns
- Neutral asset turnover suggests average operational efficiency
FactSet Weaknesses
- Higher debt-to-assets ratio indicates more leverage risk
- Unfavorable price-to-book ratio may imply overvaluation concerns
- Moderate current ratio points to weaker short-term liquidity
Cboe excels in liquidity and moderate leverage with strong profitability, while FactSet shows higher profitability but increased leverage and slightly weaker liquidity. These contrasts highlight their differing capital structures and operational efficiencies.
The Moat Duel: Analyzing Competitive Defensibility
A structural moat is the only barrier protecting long-term profits from relentless competitive erosion. Let’s dissect the economic moats of two financial data giants:
Cboe Global Markets, Inc.: Dominant Market Access and Scale Moat
Cboe’s moat stems from its vast network effects across options and derivatives trading. It boasts a robust ROIC 10% above WACC with a 53% growth trend, reflecting efficient capital use and margin stability. Expansion in global FX and futures markets in 2026 may deepen this advantage.
FactSet Research Systems Inc.: Intangible Assets and Data Integration Moat
FactSet’s moat relies on proprietary analytics platforms and sticky client relationships, contrasting Cboe’s exchange-driven model. It creates value with ROIC exceeding WACC by 9.6%, but the declining 23% ROIC trend signals pressure on profitability. Continued international expansion could arrest this decline.
Market Access vs. Data Integration: Which Moat Runs Deeper?
Cboe’s growing ROIC and scale-driven network effects form a wider, more sustainable moat. FactSet creates value but faces margin pressure and a shrinking moat. Cboe stands better poised to defend and grow market share.
Which stock offers better returns?
Over the past year, Cboe Global Markets, Inc. and FactSet Research Systems Inc. exhibited contrasting stock price trends, marked by significant divergence in returns and trading volumes.
Trend Comparison
Cboe’s stock rose 48.95% over 12 months, showing a bullish trend with accelerating momentum and a 27.47 volatility measure. It peaked at 276.39 and bottomed at 167.6.
FactSet’s stock declined 56.44%, reflecting a bearish trend with decelerating losses and higher volatility near 70.83. Its highest price was 490.67 and the lowest 207.32.
Cboe clearly outperformed FactSet, delivering substantially stronger market returns over the analyzed period.
Target Prices
Analysts present optimistic target prices for both Cboe Global Markets and FactSet Research Systems, reflecting confidence in their market positions.
| Company | Target Low | Target High | Consensus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cboe Global Markets, Inc. | 240 | 295 | 274 |
| FactSet Research Systems Inc. | 215 | 321 | 288 |
The consensus targets for Cboe and FactSet exceed their current prices, signaling analyst expectations for upside potential in these financial data and exchange leaders.
Don’t Let Luck Decide Your Entry Point
Optimize your entry points with our advanced ProRealTime indicators. You’ll get efficient buy signals with precise price targets for maximum performance. Start outperforming now!
How do institutions grade them?
Here is a summary of recent institutional grades for Cboe Global Markets, Inc. and FactSet Research Systems Inc.:
Cboe Global Markets, Inc. Grades
The following table lists recent grades assigned by reputable institutions for Cboe Global Markets, Inc.:
| Grading Company | Action | New Grade | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| TD Cowen | maintain | Hold | 2026-01-14 |
| Piper Sandler | maintain | Overweight | 2026-01-14 |
| Barclays | maintain | Overweight | 2026-01-08 |
| UBS | maintain | Neutral | 2026-01-07 |
| Morgan Stanley | maintain | Underweight | 2025-12-22 |
| Barclays | upgrade | Overweight | 2025-12-12 |
| Barclays | maintain | Equal Weight | 2025-11-03 |
| Keefe, Bruyette & Woods | maintain | Market Perform | 2025-11-03 |
| Citigroup | maintain | Neutral | 2025-11-03 |
| UBS | maintain | Neutral | 2025-11-03 |
FactSet Research Systems Inc. Grades
The following table presents recent institutional grades for FactSet Research Systems Inc.:
| Grading Company | Action | New Grade | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wells Fargo | maintain | Underweight | 2026-02-04 |
| Wells Fargo | maintain | Underweight | 2026-01-14 |
| Evercore ISI Group | maintain | In Line | 2026-01-08 |
| BMO Capital | maintain | Market Perform | 2025-12-22 |
| Stifel | maintain | Hold | 2025-12-19 |
| Goldman Sachs | maintain | Sell | 2025-12-19 |
| RBC Capital | maintain | Sector Perform | 2025-12-19 |
| Morgan Stanley | upgrade | Equal Weight | 2025-12-17 |
| Wells Fargo | maintain | Underweight | 2025-12-05 |
| UBS | upgrade | Buy | 2025-09-22 |
Which company has the best grades?
Cboe Global Markets, Inc. consistently receives overweight and hold ratings, indicating moderate confidence from analysts. FactSet Research Systems Inc. shows predominantly underweight and neutral grades, with one buy upgrade. Investors may perceive Cboe as having stronger institutional support, potentially reflecting more favorable market expectations.
Risks specific to each company
The following categories identify the critical pressure points and systemic threats facing both firms in the 2026 market environment:
1. Market & Competition
Cboe Global Markets, Inc.
- Faces intense competition in global options and equities exchanges, requiring constant innovation to maintain market position.
FactSet Research Systems Inc.
- Competes in financial data and analytics with pressure to expand product offerings amid evolving client demands.
2. Capital Structure & Debt
Cboe Global Markets, Inc.
- Maintains a conservative debt-to-equity ratio of 0.33, supporting financial stability but shows weak interest coverage at -28.95.
FactSet Research Systems Inc.
- Carries higher leverage with a debt-to-equity ratio of 0.71 and healthier interest coverage of 13.8, posing moderate financial risk.
3. Stock Volatility
Cboe Global Markets, Inc.
- Exhibits low beta at 0.36, indicating less stock volatility and defensive characteristics in turbulent markets.
FactSet Research Systems Inc.
- Shows moderate beta of 0.73, implying higher sensitivity to market swings and greater volatility.
4. Regulatory & Legal
Cboe Global Markets, Inc.
- Subject to stringent financial exchange regulations worldwide, increasing compliance costs and legal exposure.
FactSet Research Systems Inc.
- Faces regulatory scrutiny over data privacy and intellectual property, requiring ongoing investment in compliance.
5. Supply Chain & Operations
Cboe Global Markets, Inc.
- Operations rely on robust IT infrastructure with risk from technology disruptions and cyber threats.
FactSet Research Systems Inc.
- Depends heavily on technology platforms and data accuracy, vulnerable to system failures and cyber risks.
6. ESG & Climate Transition
Cboe Global Markets, Inc.
- ESG initiatives are emerging, with growing pressure to integrate sustainable practices in trading and clearing.
FactSet Research Systems Inc.
- Faces increasing investor demand for ESG data products, requiring adaptation to climate-related analytics.
7. Geopolitical Exposure
Cboe Global Markets, Inc.
- Global operations expose it to geopolitical tensions affecting international trading volumes and regulations.
FactSet Research Systems Inc.
- International client base subjects it to geopolitical risks impacting data accessibility and market confidence.
Which company shows a better risk-adjusted profile?
Cboe’s most impactful risk is its negative interest coverage, signaling potential challenges servicing debt despite low leverage. FactSet’s key risk lies in higher leverage, raising financial vulnerability despite strong interest coverage. Cboe’s lower beta and safer Altman Z-Score offer a more resilient risk-adjusted profile. The widening gap between Cboe’s stable beta of 0.36 and FactSet’s volatile 0.73 underscores market preference for lower volatility amid economic uncertainties.
Final Verdict: Which stock to choose?
Cboe Global Markets, Inc. (CBOE) impresses with its superpower in delivering steadily growing returns on invested capital well above its cost of capital. This reflects a robust economic moat and efficient capital allocation. Its point of vigilance is a relatively high price-to-book ratio, which might temper valuation appeal. CBOE suits investors targeting aggressive growth with a tolerance for premium pricing.
FactSet Research Systems Inc. (FDS) benefits from a durable strategic moat rooted in recurring revenue and data analytics dominance. It offers a safer profile than CBOE, supported by solid income quality and a strong interest coverage ratio. However, its declining ROIC trend signals caution on sustaining profitability. FDS fits well in Growth at a Reasonable Price (GARP) portfolios valuing stability alongside growth.
If you prioritize sustained value creation and accelerating growth metrics, CBOE outshines due to its expanding profitability and efficient capital use. However, if you seek a more stable cash flow base with a focus on recurring revenue safety, FDS offers better stability despite its recent profitability headwinds. Both present analytical scenarios appealing to distinct investor profiles, emphasizing the need for alignment with individual risk tolerance and investment horizon.
Disclaimer: Investment carries a risk of loss of initial capital. The past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results. Be sure to understand risks before making an investment decision.
Go Further
I encourage you to read the complete analyses of Cboe Global Markets, Inc. and FactSet Research Systems Inc. to enhance your investment decisions:
