VOL. XCIV, NO. 247

★ MOAT STOCKS & COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES ★

PRICE: 5 CENTS

Thursday, December 25, 2025

TransUnion

TRU · New York Stock Exchange

active
Market cap (USD)$16.8B
SectorFinancials
CountryUS
Data as of
Moat score
61/ 100

Weighted average of segment moat scores, combining moat strength, durability, confidence, market structure, pricing power, and market share.

Request update

Spot something outdated? Send a quick note and source so we can refresh this profile.

Overview

TransUnion is a global consumer credit reporting and risk information provider, and is one of the three nationwide U.S. consumer reporting companies. Its U.S. financial services business is anchored by a large credit-file registry and contributory data network, reinforced by deep integration into lender underwriting and fraud workflows and by fixed-cost compliance under FCRA and related regimes. Emerging verticals (insurance, telecom, tenant/employment screening, retail/e-commerce, public sector) are more competitive; TransUnion's edge there comes mainly from reusing shared data/analytics platforms and embedding SaaS decisioning into customer workflows. Internationally, the company operates credit bureau and analytics franchises in multiple regions, including concentrated markets such as Canada (two nationwide agencies) and India where the CIBIL score is widely used.

Primary segment

U.S. Markets - Financial Services

Market structure

Oligopoly

Market share

HHI:

Coverage

4 segments · 5 tags

Updated 2025-12-23

Segments

U.S. Markets - Financial Services

U.S. consumer credit bureau data & risk analytics for lenders

Revenue

34.2%

Structure

Oligopoly

Pricing

moderate

Share

Peers

EFXEXPN.LFICO

U.S. Markets - Emerging Verticals

U.S. identity, fraud, and industry risk data/analytics for non-core lending verticals

Revenue

29%

Structure

Competitive

Pricing

moderate

Share

Peers

RELXEFXEXPN.L

U.S. Markets - Consumer Interactive

U.S. consumer credit monitoring, identity protection, and credit education products

Revenue

14%

Structure

Competitive

Pricing

weak

Share

Peers

INTUGENEFXEXPN.L

International

Non-U.S. credit reporting and risk/identity analytics (Canada, UK, India, LatAm, Africa, APAC)

Revenue

22.8%

Structure

Oligopoly

Pricing

moderate

Share

Peers

EXPN.LEFX

Moat Claims

U.S. Markets - Financial Services

U.S. consumer credit bureau data & risk analytics for lenders

Revenue_share based on FY2024 gross revenue (Financial Services $1,433.8M) divided by sum of disclosed gross revenues across verticals/regions ($4,196.4M; totals have minor rounding vs $4,196.3M shown). Source: FY2024 Annual Report / Form 10-K Note 19 segment table (https://investors.transunion.com/~/media/Files/T/Transunion-IR-V2/annual-reports/2024/2024-annual-report.pdf).

Oligopoly

Standards Registry

Network

Strength: 5/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 2 evidence

Nationwide consumer credit file registry; incumbency reinforced by the small number of nationwide bureaus and the need for broad, longitudinal credit histories for underwriting.

Erosion risks

  • Regulatory reform reduces allowable uses of traditional credit reports
  • Open banking / alternative data reduces reliance on bureau files
  • Large-scale data breach or accuracy failures reduce trust and raise compliance costs

Leading indicators

  • Major changes to FCRA/CFPB rules affecting bureau data or dispute processes
  • Adoption of open banking-based credit models in mortgage/consumer lending
  • Large lender mix shifts between bureaus or move away from tri-merge reports

Counterarguments

  • Large lenders often use multiple bureaus and can shift pull volumes
  • Specialty and alternative-data providers can substitute for some underwriting/marketing use cases

Data Network Effects

Network

Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 2 evidence

Contributory credit data model and massive file scale: more participating furnishers and richer histories improve matching and analytic performance.

Erosion risks

  • Data furnishers reduce reporting cadence/coverage
  • Regulators mandate greater portability/sharing that reduces differentiation
  • Analytic model performance converges as datasets commoditize

Leading indicators

  • Coverage of new data sources (alt data, telecom/utility) in core files
  • File match rates and model performance metrics (if disclosed)
  • Material furnishers changing reporting arrangements

Counterarguments

  • Major furnishers typically report to multiple bureaus, limiting exclusivity
  • Alternative-data and open-banking datasets can bypass bureau-based histories for some segments

Data Workflow Lockin

Demand

Strength: 4/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 4/5 · 3 evidence

Embedded in lender decision workflows (origination, account management, fraud/ID). Bundled suites and integration depth raise switching costs and support retention.

Erosion risks

  • Standardized decisioning platforms and APIs lower switching friction
  • Large customers renegotiate aggressively and maintain multi-bureau sourcing
  • Value capture shifts toward score providers and aggregators/resellers

Leading indicators

  • Net revenue retention / renewal outcomes for top financial services accounts
  • Attach rate of fraud/identity + marketing products sold into lender workflows
  • Pricing realization in mortgage/auto despite volume volatility

Counterarguments

  • Core credit reporting agreements are often terminable on 30-180 days notice, allowing renegotiation and reallocation to competitors
  • Large lenders can use multiple bureaus in parallel and route volumes dynamically

Compliance Advantage

Legal

Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 4/5 · 2 evidence

Operating a nationwide consumer reporting business requires substantial compliance, dispute handling, and security capabilities under FCRA and related regimes.

Erosion risks

  • New rules increase compliance and remediation costs
  • Regulatory enforcement or consent orders restrict business practices
  • Privacy/AI regulations limit permissible data use

Leading indicators

  • CFPB/FTC enforcement actions and consent-order developments
  • Changes in dispute volumes and resolution timelines
  • Material changes to U.S. state privacy laws affecting data use

Counterarguments

  • Compliance capabilities are not exclusive - other nationwide bureaus already have them
  • New entrants can avoid FCRA scope by focusing on non-FCRA alternative data products

U.S. Markets - Emerging Verticals

U.S. identity, fraud, and industry risk data/analytics for non-core lending verticals

Revenue_share based on FY2024 gross revenue (Emerging Verticals $1,215.5M) divided by sum of disclosed gross revenues across verticals/regions ($4,196.4M). Source: FY2024 Annual Report / Form 10-K Note 19 segment table (https://investors.transunion.com/~/media/Files/T/Transunion-IR-V2/annual-reports/2024/2024-annual-report.pdf).

Competitive

Scope Economies

Supply

Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 4/5 · 2 evidence

Shared data assets and platform capabilities reused across multiple industry verticals; product and model development can be amortized over a broader base.

Erosion risks

  • Vertical-specific specialists out-innovate generalist platforms
  • Commoditization of identity and fraud tooling
  • Regulatory constraints reduce reusability of data across use cases

Leading indicators

  • Cross-sell rate of shared identity/fraud capabilities across verticals
  • Product development velocity (new solution launches) relative to peers
  • Gross margin trends in emerging vertical products

Counterarguments

  • Many vertical markets have strong incumbent specialists (e.g., insurance and tenant screening data providers)
  • Buyers may prefer best-of-breed point solutions over broad platforms

Data Workflow Lockin

Demand

Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence

SaaS and real-time decisioning services integrate into customer processes (fraud, identity, screening) and can increase switching costs once embedded.

Erosion risks

  • API standardization reduces integration switching costs
  • Customers bring decisioning in-house or consolidate vendors
  • Price competition pushes buyers to rebid frequently

Leading indicators

  • Renewal rates for SaaS decisioning products
  • Share of revenue from recurring subscriptions vs transactional pulls
  • Implementation time and integration depth with large accounts

Counterarguments

  • Many products are sold via resellers/partners, weakening direct lock-in
  • Procurement-led vendor rationalization can displace embedded tools

Compliance Advantage

Legal

Strength: 2/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 2 evidence

Handling regulated consumer data (e.g., tenant screening under FCRA) requires compliance infrastructure, but compliance failures can quickly erode trust and increase costs.

Erosion risks

  • CFPB/FTC enforcement actions and consent orders raise costs and constrain products
  • Data accuracy issues in screening products cause reputational harm
  • State privacy laws restrict permissible data usage

Leading indicators

  • New consent orders, fines, or mandated remediation programs
  • Dispute rates and adverse action complaint trends in screening products
  • Customer churn following high-profile compliance incidents

Counterarguments

  • Compliance capabilities are table stakes in regulated verticals
  • Regulators can apply similar standards across incumbents, reducing differentiation

U.S. Markets - Consumer Interactive

U.S. consumer credit monitoring, identity protection, and credit education products

Revenue_share based on FY2024 gross revenue (Consumer Interactive $588.7M) divided by sum of disclosed gross revenues across verticals/regions ($4,196.4M). Source: FY2024 Annual Report / Form 10-K Note 19 segment table (https://investors.transunion.com/~/media/Files/T/Transunion-IR-V2/annual-reports/2024/2024-annual-report.pdf).

Competitive

Brand Trust

Demand

Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 2 evidence

TransUnion brand recognition as a nationwide credit bureau helps acquire consumer users for monitoring/freeze and identity offerings.

Erosion risks

  • Free credit monitoring/scores offered by banks and fintechs reduce willingness to pay
  • Regulatory actions related to marketing and disclosures
  • Data breaches or inaccurate reports reduce consumer trust

Leading indicators

  • Direct-channel subscription growth and churn
  • Advertising efficiency (CAC) and conversion rates
  • Share of consumers using free alternatives (bank/fintech credit monitoring)

Counterarguments

  • Many competitors offer similar services at low or zero cost
  • Consumer switching costs are low and price sensitivity is high

Habit Default

Demand

Strength: 2/5 · Durability: fragile · Confidence: 3/5 · 2 evidence

Ongoing monitoring and identity protection subscriptions can become habitual, but differentiation is limited and pricing pressure is high.

Erosion risks

  • Legislation requiring free consumer disclosures and monitoring reduces paid revenue pools
  • Breach remediation demand is episodic and can be volatile
  • Platform policy changes and ad market weakness raise acquisition costs

Leading indicators

  • Direct channel revenue trend vs breach remediation revenue
  • Subscription churn and ARPU trends
  • Regulatory enforcement actions impacting marketing practices

Counterarguments

  • Consumers can cancel and switch quickly with minimal friction
  • Banks and fintechs can bundle free monitoring into broader financial apps

International

Non-U.S. credit reporting and risk/identity analytics (Canada, UK, India, LatAm, Africa, APAC)

Revenue_share based on FY2024 gross revenue (International $958.4M) divided by sum of disclosed gross revenues across verticals/regions ($4,196.4M). Source: FY2024 Annual Report / Form 10-K Note 19 segment table (https://investors.transunion.com/~/media/Files/T/Transunion-IR-V2/annual-reports/2024/2024-annual-report.pdf).

Oligopoly

Standards Registry

Network

Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 1 evidence

In many countries, credit reporting functions as a national registry with few scaled participants; TransUnion holds top positions in several regions (e.g., Canada duopoly).

Erosion risks

  • Country-level regulation changes or data localization requirements
  • Macro volatility and FX moves reduce reported growth and pricing flexibility
  • Open banking and new data sources change credit decision inputs

Leading indicators

  • Regulatory developments in major regions (Canada, UK, India)
  • Adoption of open banking / alternative data in credit underwriting
  • Competitive share shifts in key countries

Counterarguments

  • Market structure varies by country; some regions are more competitive than 'national bureau' archetype
  • Local incumbents and government-linked registries can be strong competitors

De Facto Standard

Network

Strength: 4/5 · Durability: durable · Confidence: 4/5 · 1 evidence

India: CIBIL brand and score is widely used in the Indian financial services industry, reinforcing a standard-setting position.

Erosion risks

  • Regulators or industry adopt alternative scoring models
  • Increased competition from other bureaus or fintech data platforms
  • Changes to credit reporting standards or governance in India

Leading indicators

  • Share of lending decisions using CIBIL score vs alternatives
  • Regulatory approvals for competing scores
  • Growth of credit-active population and bureau inquiries in India

Counterarguments

  • Standard position can be disrupted by regulatory mandate or new scoring entrants
  • Banks may diversify bureau sources to mitigate concentration risk

Compliance Advantage

Legal

Strength: 3/5 · Durability: medium · Confidence: 3/5 · 1 evidence

Credit reporting is often regulated; compliance and authorization to operate can be a barrier, but not exclusive.

Erosion risks

  • Compliance costs rise faster than revenue in certain countries
  • Regulatory enforcement actions restrict product design or marketing
  • Data localization requirements force costly infrastructure duplication

Leading indicators

  • Regulatory examinations and enforcement outcomes in major jurisdictions
  • Changes in privacy laws affecting cross-border analytics
  • Cost-to-serve trends by region

Counterarguments

  • Authorization/compliance is achievable for multiple incumbents; not an exclusive license
  • Some countries have government or quasi-government credit registries

Evidence

regulation
CFPB - List of consumer reporting companies (nationwide bureaus)

There are three big nationwide providers of consumer reports: Equifax, TransUnion, and Experian.

Supports oligopolistic structure and 'registry' nature of nationwide consumer reporting.

sec_filing
TransUnion FY2024 Form 10-K (fiscal year ended Dec 31, 2024)

...we built a comprehensive and unique database of United States ("U.S.") consumer information.

Describes a large, hard-to-replicate U.S. consumer data asset consistent with a registry moat.

sec_filing
TransUnion FY2024 Form 10-K (Business Overview)

We operate primarily on contributory data models... obtain updated information at little or no cost.

Contributory data model is consistent with a data network effect (participants contribute to receive value).

sec_filing
TransUnion FY2024 Form 10-K (Risk Factors - cybersecurity)

...we collect, store and transmit... consumer information on over one billion consumers...

Scale of consumer files suggests high data breadth and depth versus smaller entrants.

sec_filing
TransUnion FY2024 Form 10-K (Business Overview)

Businesses embed our solutions into their workflows to deliver critical insights and enable effective actions.

Directly supports workflow embedment / integration-based switching costs.

Showing 5 of 21 sources.

Risks & Indicators

Erosion risks

  • Regulatory reform reduces allowable uses of traditional credit reports
  • Open banking / alternative data reduces reliance on bureau files
  • Large-scale data breach or accuracy failures reduce trust and raise compliance costs
  • Data furnishers reduce reporting cadence/coverage
  • Regulators mandate greater portability/sharing that reduces differentiation
  • Analytic model performance converges as datasets commoditize

Leading indicators

  • Major changes to FCRA/CFPB rules affecting bureau data or dispute processes
  • Adoption of open banking-based credit models in mortgage/consumer lending
  • Large lender mix shifts between bureaus or move away from tri-merge reports
  • Coverage of new data sources (alt data, telecom/utility) in core files
  • File match rates and model performance metrics (if disclosed)
  • Material furnishers changing reporting arrangements
Created 2025-12-23
Updated 2025-12-23

Curation & Accuracy

This directory blends AI‑assisted discovery with human curation. Entries are reviewed, edited, and organized with the goal of expanding coverage and sharpening quality over time. Your feedback helps steer improvements (because no single human can capture everything all at once).

Details change. Pricing, features, and availability may be incomplete or out of date. Treat listings as a starting point and verify on the provider’s site before making decisions. If you spot an error or a gap, send a quick note and I’ll adjust.