V
Verisk Analytics, Inc.
VRSK · Industrials
Q4 FY2025
Earning ended Dec 31, 2025Report generated Mar 10, 2026
The Insurance Industry's Operating System, Priced for Mediocrity
The market is pricing Verisk as a slow-growth tollbooth when it's actually an infrastructure business whose value proposition directly scales with insurance industry volatility — the same climate events hammering carriers are structurally increasing demand for better catastrophe models, finer-grained loss data, and more defensible rate filings, meaning the thing that looks like a headwind for the industry is a demand engine for Verisk.
Flowly Score
Apr 16 Close
+113%$178.31
Fair Value
$380.00
80
Excellentat $178.31
Business Strength9/10
A cornered-resource moat built over five decades — ISO loss cost data, 50-state regulatory filings, and embedded fraud detection workflows that would take any competitor a generation to replicate. The deliberate shedding of lower-quality businesses leaves a purer, higher-ROIC entity earning software-like margins on what looks from the outside like an industrial data company.
Financial Resilience7/10
OCF consistently outstrips reported earnings and FCF margins have held in elite territory for five straight years — this business collects before it costs, and CapEx intensity is shrinking even as revenues grow. The flag worth watching is meaningful debt expansion from the accelerated buyback program, though current FCF generation makes debt service comfortably manageable.
Growth & Trajectory7/10
Subscription revenues growing at high single digits organically with 84% of revenue contractually sticky is exactly the profile you want from a data utility — boring, durable, compounding. Climate volatility and AI adoption in underwriting are structural demand accelerators that the consensus still treats as background noise rather than deliberate tailwinds.
Valuation7/10at $210.28
Even the stress-tested bear case DCF implies substantial upside from current levels — an extraordinary signal for a business of this quality. Multiple compression post-divestiture has created an entry point where you're buying a demonstrably better, more focused business at a lower earnings multiple than you paid for the conglomerate version.
Risk7/10
The most credible structural threat is mega-carrier defection: a handful of large writers already operating sophisticated internal data science teams could quietly reduce ISO dependency over time, degrading the network effect from the top down. The antitrust latency in the ISO data-sharing model is the risk that rarely surfaces but could force structural changes if regulators ever decide to scrutinize a legal arrangement that looks, from certain angles, like competitors sharing pricing data.
Verisk post-divestiture is a cleaner, higher-quality business trading at a lower multiple than the conglomerate it shed — that's the anomaly worth owning. Five decades of actuarial loss data embedded into every rate filing, policy form, and fraud workflow in American P&C insurance creates switching costs measured not in implementation effort but in regulatory re-approval cycles spanning years. ROIC expanding off already-elite levels while CapEx intensity shrinks is operating leverage made visible in the numbers. The growth mechanism is counterintuitive: climate volatility creates structural demand for better catastrophe models, finer-grained risk selection, and the analytics needed to defend rate increases before state commissioners. The AI layer compounds this — proprietary historical claims data becomes a more valuable training substrate each year, and 35 active AI projects signal a company embedding deeper into carrier workflows rather than defending a static product suite. The specific risk worth naming is defection, not competition. If the largest premium writers reduce ISO data contributions and build parallel pricing infrastructure internally, the network effect degrades quietly. Progressive has operated outside the ISO ecosystem for years; whether mid-market carriers remain dependent on ISO data as mega-carriers chart their own analytical course is the slow-moving structural question that ultimately determines whether this moat is widening or eroding at the edges.