Reddit Posts
US directs Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac to approve VantageScore for all lenders. "FICO has enjoyed a monopoly. No more"
Pre-Market Gainers and Losers for Today (August 18, 2026) 📈 📉
Pre-Market Gainers and Losers for Today (August 17, 2026) 📈 📉
TransUnion (TRU) - data and analytics moat play trading near 30% below targets with financial sector tailwinds
J.P Morgan's Top Stock Picks for 2026 - +18.68% after 4 months
Big pre-market moves in the credit scoring space. FICO up big, TransUnion and Equifax down 15%
Fair Issac $FICO down 25% in two days over FHFA director comments to make provider of credit scores to be more "economical"
WSJ - Banks Are Making Fewer Consumer Loans. That’s Bad News for Credit Bureaus
TransUnion (TRU) Stock Discussion - 26% expected CAGR
TransUnion (TRU) Stock Analysis and Valuation. Is It Worth It?
TransUnion (TRU) Stock Analysis and Valuation. Is It Worth It?
Its happening the new streak is here nowww !!! TRU
TRU Precious Metals Drills Visible Gold at Newfoundland Golden Rose Project
GoldSpot Discoveries ($SPOT) to Apply Artificial Intelligence to TRU Precious Metals Corp. Newfoundland Properties
Mentions
And sports are soap operas for guys, TRU
A few examples, from Sep 30 close to Oct 23, 2026 close: HAS (Hasbro) +33.94%; TRU (TransUnion) +33.31%; EFX (Equifax) +32.88%; OVV (Ovintiv) +24.99%; PEP (PepsiCo) +7.14%. SPY was -0.35% over the same dates. These are selected examples, not a ranking of the whole market. Price returns exclude dividends. They show the weakness wasn’t uniform; they don’t explain why AI stocks sold off. Checked in a fresh Claude chat using [Monk.trade](http://Monk.trade), which I build. Quick check: [https://i.imgur.com/x6F1gxc.gif](https://i.imgur.com/x6F1gxc.gif) Research only. Not investment advice.
Again, LISEP’s work is not taken seriously by economists and their methodology is considered flawed. Do you know how the TRU Unemployment rate is even calculated? I do not struggle with literacy, but it is evident you might be. It’s fine if you want to define the TRU Unemployment as “primarily” the percent of workers making less than $26k a year in 2025 dollars. However, that is not how LISEP defines or measures their TRU Unemployment. I can understand how someone with no economic experience would think that is insignificant and the other numbers measured do not have an impact. It’s a mistake the layman would make. Doesn’t make your interpretation correct, even by LISEP’s own interpretations of their data. Which again, you somehow interpreted to be historically low which directly contradicts LISEP’s own interpretation of **their** data. “Unearned smugness” would be you, someone who clearly has no economic experience telling us that LISEP is incorrectly interpreting their own work and arguing with people who have years of experience in the field.
LISEP’s current TRU is not sitting at an all-time low. It rose from 23.6% in March to 24.9% in July, the fourth consecutive monthly increase, and LISEP itself describes that as evidence of weakening labor-market conditions. Also, TRU is not simply ‘workers making under $26k’; it includes the jobless and people who want full-time work but can’t get it LISEP isn’t considered good economics, but I was willing to play along. Again, you’re struggling to interpret the graphs.
FRED & BLS have gone out of their way to provide resources so that the avg person with no economic background can understand these issues. use it. you’re attempting to interpret a graph and you don’t know what you’re even looking at. “The percentage of the American workforce classified as "functionally unemployed” increased for the fourth consecutive month. 23.6% in March to 24.9% in July”. https://www.lisep.org/content/functional-unemployment-up-for-fourth-consecutive-month-says-ludwig-institute?utm\_source “This marks the highest TRU since June 2021, when it reached 25.3%, and stands 1.2 percentage points higher than a year ago.” https://www.lisep.org/content/functional-unemployment-hits-highest-level-since-2021-says-ludwig-institute? “The labor force is made up of the employed and the unemployed. People are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work. People are considered employed if they did any work at all for pay or profit during the survey reference week. This includes all part-time and temporary work, as well as regular full-time, year-round employment.” -BLS The graph you are using is simply anyone who is 25-54 years of age and fully employed, part-time employed, or do not have a job and are trying to find a job. You can have millions of people unemployed and looking for work = high labor force participation rate. It does not measure the strength of the job market. A high LFP rate (no matter how you slice it) can coexist with weakening hiring conditions or rising unemployment. It’s a measure of people participating or trying to participate in the labor force, not an employment strength metric. U.S. hiring rate currently is similar to Great Recession levels. This is what people mean when they say the job market is rough. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/JTSHIR
FRED & BLS have gone out of their way to provide resources so that the avg person with no economic background can understand these issues. **use it.** you’re attempting to interpret a graph and you don’t know what you’re even looking at. “The percentage of the American workforce classified as "functionally unemployed” **increased for the fourth consecutive month.** 23.6% in March to 24.9% in July”. https://www.lisep.org/content/functional-unemployment-up-for-fourth-consecutive-month-says-ludwig-institute?utm\_source “This marks the highest TRU since June 2021, when it reached 25.3%, and stands 1.2 percentage points higher than a year ago.” https://www.lisep.org/content/functional-unemployment-hits-highest-level-since-2021-says-ludwig-institute? “The *labor force* is made up of the employed and the unemployed. People are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work. People are considered employed if they did any work at all for pay or profit during the survey reference week. This includes all part-time and temporary work, as well as regular full-time, year-round employment.” -BLS The graph you are using is simply anyone who is 25-54 years of age and fully employed, part-time employed, or **do not** have a job and are trying to find a job. You can have millions of people unemployed and looking for work = high labor force participation rate. It does **not** measure the strength of the job market. A high LFP rate (no matter how you slice it) can coexist with weakening hiring conditions or rising unemployment. It’s a measure of people participating or trying to participate in the labor force, not an employment strength metric. U.S. hiring rate currently is similar to Great Recession levels. This is what people mean when they say the job market is rough. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/JTSHIR
That lisep "TRU rate" you posted has nothing to do with NEETs. It primarily measures the percent of workers making less than $26K a year in 2025 dollars and is near an all-time historic low. The labor force participation rate needs to be controlled for age. When you do that, it's near an all-time high.
Anyone buying the FICO, TRU, $EXPGY, EFX dip? FICO took the brunt of that news but Pulte went after the credit bureaus too and tanked them as well.
Anyone buying the FICO, TRU, EXPN, EFX dip? FICO took the brunt of that news but it tanked the other 3 as well.
The first three you mentioned all made the same critical error: They failed to embrace digital/online sales fully. Nike didn't fail to do that, they oddly went the opposite direction, too far. Blockbuster had an opportunity to buy Netflix and passed on it, believing that direct to consumer mail service, and online streaming, wouldn't succeed. Sears had one of the most extensive and diverse inventory catalogs ever but they didn't embrace online Sales. They also didn't invest in better PoS systems within their stores, so purchases always took longer than other stores Toys R Us tried to embrace online sales but they had another company (Amazon) do it for them, who ended up selling other companies toys as well. Selling other people's stuff is literally what Amazon is built on so this should have come as no surprise to TRU. All three didn't embrace online sales until it was too late. By the time they did, there was extensive competition that had already claimed major portions of their market share. With declining sales and extensive real-estate expenses, they didn't have the capital to pivot. Nike embraced online sales a little too hard by trying to go Direct to Consumer, removing their product from box store shelves . They counted too heavily on their brand recognition and value. As a result, box stores searched out other brands to fill their shelves. Interestingly enough, many people like to try on athletic apparel before buying it (and many people don't like dealing with returns) . By the time they put their products back in stores, other companies had claimed part of their market share. Nike isn't dead. They don't have the extensive real-estate expenses that box stores have so they aren't bleeding money like Blockbuster, Sears, etc. Their net income is still positive (for now). They simply have reduced sales revenue. Now, if the other brands keep making amazing products, and Nike keeps making shoes that look fucking stupid, then it's very possible they keep losing market share. I don't know if this has changed, but it used to be that you couldn't get Nike on Amazon, at least not through an authorized retailer. As a result, Amazon Sellers had inconsistent inventories of sizes and their prices were much higher than you'd pay in a Dick's sporting goods store. Having a true presence on Amazon with Prime Support would probably go a long way to help them, as well as getting into more local/specialized stores as many people are choosing to shop there rather than the Academy/Dicks of the world.
# Financials (8 stocks)Equal-weight: -2.66% |Ticker|Name|Dec 22, 2025|Apr 28, 2026|% Change|JPM Target| |:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-| |**ALL**|Allstate|$207.23|$214.20|\+3.36%|$260.00| |**C**|Citigroup Inc.|$117.48|$129.14|\+9.93%|$124.00| |**GL**|Globe Life Inc|$141.92|$152.07|\+7.15%|$180.00| |**LC**|LendingClub Corp|$19.94|$17.18|\-13.84%|$25.00| |**SCHW**|Charles Schwab|$101.07|$90.76|\-10.20%|$121.00| |**TRU**|TransUnion|$87.82|$71.19|\-18.94%|$107.00| |**V**|Visa Inc.|$351.37|$309.65|\-11.87%|$430.00| |**VLY**|Valley National Bancorp|$11.97|$13.54|\+13.14%|$14.50| |**Category Average**|—|—|**-2.66%**|—|
|**Ticker**|**Dec 22, 2025 Price**|**Apr 28, 2026 Price**|**% Change**| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |**ANET**|$131.03|$172.47|\+31.63%| |**AVGO**|$340.73|$416.48|\+22.23%| |**BFAM**|$98.50|$112.30|\+14.01%| |**CRM**|$285.40|$312.15|\+9.37%| |**GWRE**|$165.20|$198.40|\+20.10%| |**KLAC**|$710.00|$845.60|\+19.10%| |**LC**|$12.40|$15.90|\+28.23%| |**PANW**|$360.20|$395.40|\+9.77%| |**SNPS**|$550.00|$620.10|\+12.75%| |**TRU**|$78.40|$89.20|\+13.78%| |**V**|$265.30|$282.10|\+6.33%| |**Category Average**|||**+17.03%**|
Why it reads 25 percent on cover page but after a bit of reading 53 percent number comes up? Based on data compiled by the Ludwig Institute for Shared Economic Prosperity (LISEP), the True Rate of Unemployment (TRU) Out of the Population for February 2026 was **53.1%**, while the official BLS Headline Rate of Unemployment (Out of the Population) was **40.7%**. The LISEP TRU tracks the percentage of the U.S. population (age 16 and older) that is "functionally unemployed"—defined as individuals without a full-time job (35+ hours/week), those working part-time who want more hours, or those earning less than a living wage ($26,000 annually in 2025 dollars). True Rate of Unemployment Out of the Population (February 2026) * **Total TRU:** 53.1% * **By Race:** * **Black:** 55.1% * **Hispanic:** 51.2% * **White:** 53.8% * **By Sex:** * **Female:** 60.4% * **Male:** 45.2% * **By Education:** * **No High School:** 81.2% * **High School Diploma:** 58.1% * **Some College:** 55.5% * **Bachelor's Degree:** 39.7% * **Advanced Degree:** 37.3% Ludwig Institute for Shared Economic Prosperity +3 *Note: The results are based on LISEP’s analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data. The official headline unemployment rate (U3) for February 2026 was reported by the BLS as 4.4%.*
Dam got stopped out this morning on 5k shares of TRU.
I’m pretty deep in both sides of the border with bags in Tilray, other LPs and MSOs and ETFs. But yes I’m selling most or all of my LPs shares 3-6 months post rescheduling, selling all of my MSOS , and will hold onto some TRU, GTI, Cresco, maybe a few other MSOs that survive longer term for uplisting. Also have calls expiring in Jan 26 and Jan 27 to dump within a few weeks of rescheduling.
Sector move looks sharp but maybe a bit knee-jerk. Hard to tell yet how much real revenue exposure TRU/EFX actually face-guidance will be key.
It looks like the market is overreacting hard on the news, TRU at \~23 PE could be worth a closer look if the fundamentals hold up, while EFX seems more stretched, but I’d also keep an eye on UPST sentiment because it could shift in their favor if investors start rotating into alternative scoring plays, I stand to be corrected.
"the stock market is down cuz the market wants the tariffs' ACTUALLY TRU DOOD. PUMP IT
TRU gonna sink like a rock
Exactly, they can “control” price in Florida since they have so large of grows, and even currently their margins are shrinking. They are 162 deep in Florida, 94 percent retail revenue, if they broke rev out state by state I would bet my portfolio their Florida market accounts for over 80 percent of total rev. I want to see if GTI and TRU could compete in unlimited license states ( I know Florida is one, but see how GTI isn’t deep in FL, they tend to stay in limited license states). Cresco has been holding positions in a ton of competitive markets, even Michigan. I’m long GTI and Cresco. Only two positions I hold.
LISEP true rate of unemployment (TRU) is about 24.3%
Agreed - I’ll likely add some to GTI TRU Cresco , maybe 1-2 other T2 or T3 to average down - ONLY if we get confirmation that DJT is NOT going to kill rescheduling. I really need to DCA in the lows again but can’t stomach any more potential major losses until we get some confirmed non rumors on rescheduling.
Yea PE sold off the land to an REIT under the same umbrella. Sold off the equipment to lease it back to the restaurants. So the restaurants are saddled with two lease line items which are higher than the taxes and maintenance they are paying. Can’t keep up. Business closes Same with TRU. Sold off the buildings and land. Leased it back. Company saddled with $400 million per month payments. Unsustainable. PE is a scourge that will continue to run already struggling businesses into the ground.
>Less than two months after the U.S. Department of Education resumed collection activities on defaulted loans, federal student loan delinquencies jumped to 31.0% in April 2025, compared with 20.5% in February 2025, TransUnion (NYSE:TRU) said on Tuesday, citing updated analysis. LMAO
ISRAEL is going to attack Iran. All planes will not turn around and head home, while not doing a friendly “Plane Wave” to Iran. Some will be hurt, the Ceasefire is not in effect! Thank you for your attention to this matter! DON J. TRU, PRES OF THE UNITED STATES. I gotta take a huge Diet Coke dump. Oh is my voice to text still on JD?
[The latest BLS data estimates that about 5,674,000 of the people classified as "not in the labor force" currently want a job](https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t01.htm). This represents about 5.6% of the estimated 102,088,000 people who were "not in the labor force" in April 2025. Counting all of those people as "unemployed" would raise the headline unemployment rate for April 2025 from 4.2% to 7.3%: https://preview.redd.it/oogk2nhxlr3f1.png?width=1320&format=png&auto=webp&s=ec78ee6ce52677f8f4ce6a8184d0b76e549bdcbb ([Chart source](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1Jl6u)) Including the people who are not in the labor force but want a job would also raise LISEP's so-called "True Rate of Unemployment" by a similar 3.1 percentage points, since the U-3 and "TRU" rates both only consider people in the labor force.
Found this on X: $FICO / $EFX / $TRU are all under pressure, reportedly due to a National Mortgage News article circulating about the FHFA showing openness to incorporating more advanced credit metrics.
My bits of GTI TRU MSOS did Ok Ascend on the other side decends with Tilroy Baggins
TRU needed to die. I get that for many parents it was the best spot for them, but for anyone else it was a nightmare trying to buy a single action figure while the only register is manned by an undertrained minimum wage employee dealing with a mom with two kids on an absolute tear because a flyer gave a different price.
GTBIF recovering nicely. I’m tempted to take mild profits there and lower my TRU average? Though that could be a bonehead move.
Lenders & Servicers \-NAVI \-SOFI \-LC (ancillary, but overall debt affected) Consumer Debt \-DFS \-WFC SLABs (Student Loan Asset-Backed Securities) Investors (surge in delinquency reporting/operational impacts) \-EFX \-TRU
Not hot take - since the massive drop in TRU my GTII positions are my top holding by current market share. TRU 2nd biggest , Cresco 3rd then Curaleaf Verano and all the shite LPs
TRU only went bankrupt because some PE bros wanted to make a quick buck
> You’re missing the part that asset prices reflect all KNOWN information or that information is poor quality. Unknown information is not reflected on the market price. If a company like Meta performs in a manner that is unexpected, then the market will adjust their expectations accordingly. This should be impossible according to the strong form of EMH, ALL available information is incorporated, both public and private. So no not missing anything. EMH suggests that everything Zuckerberg knows would be built into the market, which is clearly wrong. Also, even if you assume a weaker version of EMH -- take a look at how EPS estimates changed for META. Did they go up 600% for 2025E? No. > Regardless, over 15 year time horizons, only around 12% of actively managed funds were able to outperform their benchmark after fees in the US and similar internationally. This is what we would expect, assuming that nobody had any known information that hadn’t already been priced in. It’s good evidence that out-performance of active managers during short term time frames are likely due to luck. That most active managers underperform is not evidence of EMH. Alpha is inherently zero sum, and if you are able to generate alpha, you will attract the majority of assets. This is what we have seen with multimanagers who have vastly more resources than single man shops. So you should expect excess returns to be concentrated in <50% of assets after transaction costs, the majority of which will be earned by a limited few participants. > I’m also not trying to say that markets are perfectly efficient. It’s just a model, and not a perfect reflection of real markets, exceptions do exist, but those exceptions don’t detract from the main point. Even if you don’t agree that markets are efficient, it’s undeniable that an efficient markets framework helps passive and active investors alike. All too often I see investors on reddit look at raw company performance, but they never consider the market’s expectations. In order to profit actively trading, you need to assess how the market is wrong and have really good proof that you’re right, but good luck. I don't disagree with this. The market is a tough game. Anybody who thinks this is easy is an idiot. But I don't think you can take away anything from EMH except that trying to generate alpha is extremely difficult to the point where unless you're in the 95th percentile, it's probably not worth being more than a hobby for your average investor, and that you have to think about what other market participants are thinking and doing. However, inefficiencies exist all the time, which EMH postulates should never happen. It's inherently defeatist which I very much disagree with. It is very possible to find one-off efficiencies and profit off them, and you should certainly try to capitalize on those when they come up (this stance is one where most of this subreddit would blindly disagree with me on). Doing it day in, day out is a different matter. I used to be a professional investor and was a consistent alpha generator for my fund, but it took a lot of resources (probably spent over $200K a year on research). Now as a retired individual investor, I still outperform with my long picks, but those opportunities only become apparent to me maybe two or three times a year and usually among broader market selloffs -- for example, the last longs I bought were back in Oct 2023 (LIN, ASML, TRU, MLM, SE) and August this year (LULU, UNH, SHW, BROS) -- note I don't necessarily hold all these still for anybody who reads this and wants to bandwagon, don't take this as an indicator I still own these businesses or advice.
M GANG RISE UP, IF YOU MADE MONEY YOU ARE TRU  DAYTRADERS
Both lol But look- bottom line is I have bags in both and most of my LPs are down 70%-80% currently- even with it legal in Canada. Case in point- I have lost 100% of my investments on both LPs ( CannTrust ) and one MSO as well (MedMen) There is risk and upside to both- but at this point my MSOs like GTI TRU are better off than my LPs which are down heavily.
In case you missed it in TRU earnings- 😍🥰 Achieved gross margin of 60%, with GAAP gross profit of $182 million.
I’m a long cannabis stocks investor - and long time bag holder- I’ve been buying in the sector since about 2018-2019- averaged down heavily in lows last year. I’ve lost a lot and the sector isn’t for faint of heart. Some stocks like CannTrust , MedMen, Entourage and others have gone straight to zero. I have not sold any of my shares (yet) holding for more major global reform. All shares are long , no expiry ( with exception of new calls in RH) I’ve Only added more and diversified in lows to DCA and added large positions for MSOS like GTI Trulieve, cresco , Curaleaf that have a better chance of survival. Also adding calls for LPs and MSOS expiring later this year after comment period and schedule 3 moves forward. Currently holding thousands of shares of LPs, MSOs, and ETF stickers, and calls on Tilray, CGC, MSOS and MSOX. Top performing assets by current market value are TRU, GTI, Cresco Labs, Curaleaf, Verano, Worst picks were CannTrust, Entourage, MedMen, NBEV. Good luck to all longs!!
Think Bain capital owned TRU at the time, they pillaged the place, also Wal mart selling same merchandise cheaper
Short term profits over long term gains. The land value alone was worth more in 10 years than TRU would've generated. New management comes in, guts the fish, throws away the carcass and they dine on the fillet.
Please review their investor day slides. Primary reasons I'm staying away from this for several years: Regulatory 2nd COLA application won't be submitted until late this year, probably next year. While they worked with NRC to update what was lacking in the first submittal (2020), I believe that lack of precedent with light water reactors will significantly delay approval. Probably 2027-28. Infrastructure and Operations They highlight in their risk factors that they could be wildly underestimating the cost to build each reactor facility ($77m with 2 acre plot). These will not be fully automated and will require at least some presence of a highly skilled workforce - counterintuitive to one of their pillars of "rural and remote" areas. The reactor may be innovative and state of the art, but it's generating heat (steam) that spins a turbine and is rectified for immediate DC use or converted for efficient transmission AC. Recycling of used fuel (Uranium) This is a very significant part of their path to profitability and assumes fuel cost can be reduced by 80%. This is an incredibly complex process that they have no plan for processing on-site at the reactor facilities. If it needs to be outsourced, I imagine a pretty large fee would be required if they were to receive back the U/TRU. I understand investor days aren't for this level of detail, but it's a vital component of their business plan, and it's entirely glossed over. Cool concept. Long road full of lessons learned before this is remotely profitable. GL playing the pump on news, but bail if profit is beyond the horizon.
Nice my TRU is up +155% GTI up 95%
Looks like I bought GTI and TRU at the daily top haha
wow we're off to a galloping start this morning with GTI and TRU
For my son’s 10th birthday my mom gave him $1000 to invest in individual stocks to learn about the stock market. He picked 5 companies (as I remember it was something like McDonalds, Toys R Us, Borders, GE, Coke) and we split it to about $200 each. We had all dividends go to cash. Whenever the cash balance hit $200 he’d pick another stock to invest. At one point he added Tesla (gold!) and when he was 21 I signed the account over to him and he took it from there. With the addition of Tesla the account was worth over $4k at one point. So he did good in spite of the couple of bankruptcies (TRU and Borders). Good lesson for him
You mean like Trump, who had more people working for $15/hour than anything that came out of a Democrat administration? Sure, working for Uber as a side gig technically counts as two jobs, as does working two regular jobs because it's the only way to make ends meet. https://www.cnet.com/personal-finance/low-unemployment-statistics-are-misleading-economic-hardship-is-much-worse/ True unemployment is much higher than it should be. > By LISEP's measures, unemployment in October was 23.6%, closer to one-fifth of the labor force. And it's even higher when looking at certain gender, educational and racial breakdowns: The Black and Latino populations have a higher TRU than their white equivalents (28.2% and 25.9% compared to 22.5% respectively), and the TRU for women is steeper than it is for men (28.5% compared to 19.1%). The TRU for those with less than a high school education is double what it is for those with some college education (47.6% compared to 27.4%).
I just came here late to say I agree with you OP, I invested after they dipped a bit off the TransUnion earnings disaster at around the $850 mark (TRU has since recovered too). This is a monster business with lots of runway for growth in scores alone, and their software side provides the other half of their revenue with margins that are likely to improve in the next 5 to 10 years as the major capex has been spent already. Some investment is still required in software that they touched in in the most recent earnings call, but I doubt we see it play out similarly to big tech who have to overpay for acquisitions and SBC for employees. Adding to this is that I think emerging markets will need credit to sustain high growth rates, especially India, and FICO has been marketing heavily in India to get banks into FICO Platform. Falcon is also a powerhouse global solution in the fraud space, and many think we are in a golden age of fraud, it could mean that any company that offers good detection and defense will make a killing. You can come up with some insane valuations for this company. Another consideration is that they have a relatively low market cap, and everyone is starting to think their assets are amazing (and they are) so there could be some big overpay acquisition from a massive financial institution or big tech company at some point.
TransUnion equity is your classic - health of the consumer / leading GDP indicator. TRU is off 65%, -47% of that is since September. CFOs of financial sector equities don’t want to create panic, they ALWAYS bleed out the truth — bad news one drop at a time. ?
More color: https://old.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/17gki48/wsj_banks_are_making_fewer_consumer_loans_thats/ And this: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/transunion-stock-extends-rout-on-double-downgrade-to-underperform-at-bofa/ar-AA1iPwNO >TransUnion (NYSE:TRU) stock retreated 3.8% in Wednesday morning trading after Bank of America analyst Heather Balsky double-downgraded the stock to Underperform from Buy one day after the consumer credit firm's Q3 earnings miss and guidance cut fueled a selloff. >The stock is has cratered 23.3% so far this week as the softer lending volumes in the U.S. and U.K. and tighter credit standards weighed on the company's revenues. >"Although demand for credit remains strong despite elevated costs, banks have tightened lending standards due to weakening consumer finances and increasing capital constraints," President and CEO Chris Cartwright said Tuesday during the TRU's earnings call conference. >Balsky said her "confidence in management visibility is low," after TransUnion's (TRU) roughly 28% cut to Q4 EPS guidance. "Lingering macro headwinds and relatively high leverage are sentiment overhangs," she added, contending that the slowdown in consumer lending could continue into mid-to-late-2024.
Deceleration of growth at these valuations is like getting kneecapped at the wedding. TRU took a 24% drop because of it.
Probably selling off with sympthy with TRU. They reported this morning and down 23% today. Looks like they lowered guidance and eps for both next quarter and full year. Revising 2023 full-year guidance to account for moderating growth expectations; expecting 2 to 3 percent revenue growth, led by International Q4 Guidance: Revenue of $917M-$932M vs $974.94M consensus, Adj EPS of $0.67-$0.72 vs $0.98 consensus FY Guidance: Revenue of $3.794B-$3.809B vs $3.87B consensus, Adj EPS of $3.24-$3.28 vs $3.56 consensus
good things coming for TRU man , I feel it. #ANNAKnows
Exact same thing happened to TRU. It’s almost like trying to convince people to spend more on the same product isn’t a winning strategy.
AI is literally the most disruptive thing humanity will have experienced to date. The printing press, automobile, internet....they have nothing on AI. In my opinion the best bang for your buck is in another emerging technology. Crypto. Two in particular AGIX (SingularityNET) founded by AI pioneer Ben Goertzal TRU (Truebit) created by co-creator of Ethereum as well as the guy that created Python coding language. Oh and Fred Ersham was their first investor.
DONT GET CAUGHT CHASING BEARS. WAIT FOR BULLS TO TRU AND RALLY NEXT WEEK ON A DOVISH FED AND RATE CUTS NEWS. P.S. Rate cuts aren’t bullish when core CPI is at 6%. Something else is brewing
The BLS methodology is from the 1930s. It's actually showing an ever growing divergence from better tracking of what's going on in the economy by things like TRU. The CPI is pretty flawed as well. It's scary as shit that the Fed relies on these antiquated "surveys" when actual hard data exists across a broad spectrum of private sector service providers. ADP and the IRS know better than the BLS about employment numbers. Visa knows more about inflation than anyone. The most recent employment data showed an un-adjusted drop of about 2.5m, but "seasonal adjustments" brought that up to +500k jobs. Seasonal adjustments aren't paychecks to someone.
TRU seems like a great play honestly FICO has the widest moat but it’s priced really high for a 5-10% rev grower. Your right I’m highly considering Transunion still a solid moat 1 of the big 3 and that p/e is very low
I like the finance industry. I hold banks and insurance currently, and as I’ve mentioned I would like to buy a position in V and AXP. I haven’t gone into more ‘alternative’ financial plays such as FICO. They’re definitely on my radar but slightly outside my field of competence and I would like to do some more research before I form an opinion. However, from a very limited scan of financials of the three credit bureaus I think TRU is the better play. Tell me more about FICO.
TRU DAT! how does that work thou, how do you get a handy from lady luck?? Same applies to the footy. Team i cashed out early on, the team i wanted to bet on but scored a quick TD whilst on the loo and the odds are now trash, and the rest of the bets i hold.
TRU cpi hot fomc isn’t even worth listen to cause no fkin doubt it’s a dump day
Sounds like denial and unwillingness to do research to come to a more well-rounded conclusion. Here are a few more resources youll ignore, just like the last ones you didnt open: [Is bitcoin too volatile?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWgbW-exn7U) [Is bitcoin a bad store of value?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skFOaAc7TRU) [Bitcoin vs Visa](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sr3ekjBEYKM)
$TRU beat earnings, now hitting 2018-2019 and pandemic (low's) support level. Low dividend payout, but the yield is very high. (bullish, long term)
> Sears: Lol, no. These are employees that at one point worked for BCG. This is not evidence that Sears hired BCG. Consulting is a revolving door. People join to build experience and then leave to join other companies. There are tens of thousands of them at all kinds of firms big and small, successful and unsuccessful. It's like a university, do you assume that everyone who attended a particular university is an evil plant for that university and does the bidding of the professors in their new job? Having worked at a company previously does not mean you are eternally an evil plant owned body and soul by that company forevermore. That's insane. If you worked at McDonalds for a couple years when you were 18 does that mean you're forever a McDonald's plant? Do we have to not allow you to have any authority over lunch orders out of fear you'll direct the funds towards McDonalds as part of their grand scheme? Alternatively, what if you suck at your new job? Maybe you were a great cashier at McDonalds, but make a shitty plumber. Does that mean McDonalds is responsible for your shitty plumbing? > Toys R Us: Dude, no, this website is for homework assignments and interview case study answers. "Sophia Morgan" posted the answer to a case study question. This has nothing to do with whether or not BCG was hired by TRU, this person just answered a homework question about how she thinks Toys R Us should be fixed. The BCG matrix is a common business framework. > Circuit City: There we go. Finally, you found one example of a company which paid consulting fees to BCG. You'll note however that this was from 2005, 4 years before Circuit City went bankrupt. The company had been struggling for years. Naturally struggling companies hire help from consulting firms. So we're back to the core point "That's like freaking out that a doctor worked with a sick person. No fucking duh, it's their job." There's no causal link or any suggestion of one between BCG and the company failing. In fact, the causal link works in reverse, the company was failing so it hired a doctor. > JC Penney: Lol, no. Again, these are employees that at one point worked for BCG. This is not evidence that JCP hired BCG. There are literally tens of thousands of these people. Why don't you go find all the ones who work or worked for successful companies? ----- In sum, you claimed four companies were destroyed by BCG. You have no evidence that three of the four ever hired them - plus an additional company that also didn't hire them. One company did hire them, but FOUR YEARS BEFORE going bankrupt. And they went bankrupt during the 2008 recession, the WORST RECESSION in almost 100 years which drove many companies into bankruptcy. - Struggling companies hire consulting firms. Consulting firms cannot always fix struggling companies. - Consulting firms work with a majority of public companies over a given couple of decades. It's almost guaranteed that one or another will have worked with a company that eventually fails. Public companies have an average lifespan of only 21 years. - Consulting firms provide plans, advice, suggestions, and research. They do not run companies or make decisions. They have no power or control. You have zero support or rational behind your claims. "Firm that works with struggling companies once worked with struggling company" is not support or rational for your claims. Even more important, you've provided ZERO connection between these completely irrational, unsupported claims and "The theory is, this consulting group is responsible for planting terrible executives and business practices into the already struggling company. All the while your hedge fund buddies naked short the company into oblivion." ----- Stop making up stupid fucking conspiracy theories, you nutcase.
A predatory PE deal killed Toys R Us, there’s a book by Josh Kosman that’s really good. Also check out the podcast Grubstakers episode 27 about the TRU death.
For Toys R Us toy industry sales dropped by double digits because there wasn't anywhere for the toys to sell and there were no logistics to move the toys around. But they said "online sales" killed TRU. If that had been factual, the toys would already have been selling and the closure of the place to buy them would have been a blip. Nearly a quarter of toy sales nation wide is not a blip.
Wat? I dig TRU out of the cellar boxed dungeon at $.000005 a share and spread it around at established retail like it's a viable business and it goes to $.005 Value as opposed to collateral. Looky Mr banker, we're opening up new and repurposed w no overhead
The only reason TRU went through bankruptcy was that awful leveraged buyout plan. Without that and they did fine.
There’s one of these already in the Macy’s near me and it’s abysmal to be honest. Just a corner of the store with a bunch of tables with a mediocre toy selection on them with some TRU banners overhead.
I think Sears and TRU going bankrupt were pretty obvious, you just had to walk into either store. Same with K-Mart, Mervyns, and even JC Penney at the time.
TRU story... Especially when it's a MARgain $ACCT
I would add Trulieve also. I know they are behind on state footprint size but FCF is what will be most important. GTI and TRU will be beasts.
ITS GETTING GOT IN NYC I SEE SKIRTS AND SEE TRU THONG I HOPE YA USED THE WINTER FOR 6 pack instead of feeling sorry for ya self and eating chick fill aye and shake shack #hot twink summer
ITS GETTING GOT IN NYC I SEE SKIRTS AND SEE TRU THONG I HOPE YA USED THE WINTER FOR 6 pack instead of feeling sorry for ya self and eating chick fill aye and shake shack #hot twink summer
ITS GETTING GOT IN NYC I SEE SKIRTS AND SEE TRU THONG I HOPE YA USED THE WINTER FOR 6 pack
Anyone else saying “TRU BULL” lol fuck
That's not an entirely accurate picture of what happened to Toys R' Us. They were booming through the early 90's and were publicly traded. Then in the early 2000's, the other big box retailers and Amazon proved to be incredibly strong competition. They ended up selling off units (remember Kids R Us and Babies R Us?) and were simply failing. Wal-Mart was the first to start picking at their bones. It was only acquired and taken private once the downfall had already started. This is why it fits the OP's criteria. Once it was taken private, it was only then that they tried to establish an online presence. And it WAS working. Until like 2010-ish, then it stopped worked because Amazon had overtaken everything by then. Any traction that TRU had fell apart. Once it was clear it was a sinking ship, then the private equity vultures laid it with a ton of debt. Essentially burying any chance it have of coming back. So it's complicated - yes, private equity adding debt to the company was eventually the reason why TRU is out of business but they didn't acquire the company just to add debt to it, they had plans to restructure and go public again. TRU had a lot of idiot CEO's for a bunch of years and it probably would have went the way of Circuit City by 2010 had private equity never stepped in.
calls on $HONK & $HONK poots on $TRU & $DEAU
thats rough bro. i mean TRU was overpriced but every kid should experience at least walking through it. the world needs a new toy department store
Imagine working for them!? Literally pouring your sweat, energy, and blood into this industry. Couldn't believe what I was part of during those years. And it's funny because the whole time, they would just trash talk TRU (which is also just as bad), when in reality they were all just having a who's dick is the smallest contest. Luckily, I had my guard up from day 1 and only invested a couple stacks. Which only lost a few hundred during 2020 pitfall. People are our here really trying to change the FL cannabis industry while others are just buttfucking everyone they possibly can.
I hear u/cantos s decided 2 giv up his hi-er education aspirations n instead accepted a full time tenured position w reddit to focus on and to realize his life-long dream of doing pro-bono werk n shitpostin at will as a mod on one'v the so called "investment" subs.... ​ IS THIS TRU...???
TRU DAT! Was There! Witnessed myself ER Rooms busy AF! RED only meant BUY a Black Friday Dip Sale!
What is the ticker for Truth Network even going to be. TRU is already taken by some boomer company
Quick everybody! Sell your Sears and TRU holdings before it's too late! 😰
TRU. dont let the man convince you you have to buy things with money to have things its all an illusion
I think so. Will be interesting to see some tier 2's with an opportunity to expand. AYR has talked about their intention on expanding, FFNT will probably be a buyer as well. Could TRU possibly make a move for an established player? M/A will pickup for sure.
Ha, I also used to work for TRU, can confirm, shity company even 15 years before they went under.
Look at transunion $TRU (32%) last year
I already lost my faith in wsb but you proofed me wrong. TRU APES STIL RESIAT AT WSB!
What about insiders? hedge funds? Banks? Do they lose? Correct me if I am wrong but it seems they usual fair well. Or is it farewell? I hope for the latter. GME, SILVER, BAN NAKED SHORTS, KEN BREAKS BEDPOSTS, MAYO DREAMS CUM TRU. FUCK THE FED RESERVE AND IF YOU DISAGREE.... F U C K Y O U T O O
Sears was owned by ESL Investments not KKR. That was their mismanagement not KKRs. Did you read any of those links? None of it was bad. Leveraged debt in a growing, positive cash flow company doesn't hurt the company but can actually save it and help it prosper such as in ASO's situation (using this money to open new stores, buy product in bulk, pay off other higher interest debt, etc). KKR has done a leveraged buyout (LBO) on several very successful companies that are still doing business today. ASO shouldn't be any different. The article stated KKR has a hands off approach and has lost money this way through incompetent management - see Toys-R-Us. KKR was not the only investment firm in TRU. TRU was split between 3 of them including KKR. ASO has solid financials and financial ratios that do point to the company being undervalued at this price point. The debt from KKR will be paid off. In the short term the stock price may suffer as KKR fully/mostly exits their position in ASO as they've been doing the past several months.