Verisign Inc  (VRSN)
Other Ticker:  

Verisign Inc's



VRSN Sales vs. its Competitors Q2 2022

Comparing the results to its competitors, Verisign Inc reported Total Revenue increase in the 2 quarter 2022 by 6.83 % year on year, while most of its competitors have experienced contraction in revenues by -17.26 %, recorded in the same quarter.

List of VRSN Competitors

With net margin of 47.54 % company achieved higher profitability than its competitors.

More on VRSN Margin Comparisons

Revenue Growth Comparisons

Net Income Comparison

Verisign Inc Net Income in the 2 quarter 2022 grew year on year by 13.21 %, while most of its competitors have experienced contraction in net income by -26.05 %.

<<  More on VRSN Income Comparisons

Verisign Inc's Comment on Competitors and Industry Peers

We compete with numerous companies in each of the Registry Services and NIA Services businesses. The overall number of our competitors may increase and the identity and composition of competitors may change over time.
New technologies and the expansion of existing technologies may increase competitive pressure. We cannot assure that competing technologies developed by others or the emergence of new industry standards will not adversely affect our competitive position or render our services or technologies noncompetitive or obsolete. In addition, our markets are characterized by announcements of collaborative relationships involving our competitors. The existence or announcement of any such relationships could adversely affect our ability to attract and retain customers. As a result of the foregoing and other factors, we may not be able to compete effectively with current or future competitors, and competitive pressures that we face could materially harm our business.

Competition in Registry Services: We face competition in the domain name registry space from other gTLD and ccTLD registries that are competing for the business of entities and individuals that are seeking to establish a Web presence. In addition to the three gTLDs we operate (.com, .net and .name), and the 18 other operational gTLDs delegated before October 23, 2013, there are over 250 Latin script ccTLD registries and 38 IDN ccTLD registries. Under our agreements with ICANN, we are subject to certain restrictions in the operation of .com, .net and .name on pricing, bundling, methods of distribution, the introduction of new registry services and use of registrars that do not apply to ccTLDs and therefore may create a competitive disadvantage. If other registries launch marketing campaigns for new or existing TLDs, including forms of marketing campaigns that we are prohibited from running under the terms of our agreements with ICANN, which result in registrars or their resellers giving other TLDs greater prominence on their websites, advertising or marketing materials, we could be at a competitive disadvantage and our business could suffer.

Additional competition to our business may arise from the introduction of new TLDs by ICANN. On October 30, 2009, ICANN approved a fast track process for the awarding of new IDN ccTLDs, which have started to be introduced into the DNS root zone. Additionally, on June 13, 2012, ICANN announced it received 1,930 applications to operate over 1,400 unique new gTLDs. ICANN has begun executing registry agreements with these new gTLD applicants in connection with this initial round of gTLD applications and intends to continue recommending up to 1,400 new gTLDs for delegation into the root zone. On October 23, 2013, the DOC began to authorize, and Verisign began effectuating, the delegation of the new gTLDs. ICANN plans on offering a second round of new gTLDs after the completion of the initial round, the timing of which is uncertain. As set forth in the Verisign Labs Technical Report #1130007 version 2.2: New gTLD Security and Stability Considerations released on March 28, 2013, we continue to believe there are issues regarding the deployment of the new gTLDs that should have been addressed before any new gTLDs were delegated, and despite our efforts, some of these issues have not been addressed by ICANN sufficiently, if at all. We do not yet know the impact, if any, that these new gTLDs may have on our business, including if or how the introduction of these new gTLDs will affect registrations for .com and .net and therefore have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
Applicants for new gTLDs include companies which may have greater financial, marketing and other resources than we do, including companies that are existing competitors, domain name registrars and new entrants into the domain name industry. Furthermore, ICANN will allow the operators of new gTLDs to also own, be owned 100% by or otherwise affiliated with a registrar, whereas we are currently prohibited by our agreements with ICANN and the DOC from owning more than 15% of a registrar. As a result, operators of new gTLDs may be able to obtain competitive advantages through such vertical integration that Verisign is currently prohibited from realizing. ICANN has also approved a process pursuant to which an operator of an existing gTLD could apply to become a registrar with respect to a new gTLD. At least one gTLD operator has successfully used this process; however, it is uncertain whether we would seek, or whether ICANN and/or the DOC would approve, the necessary changes to our existing agreements to allow us to vertically integrate with respect to new gTLDs; without such changes, we may be at a competitive disadvantage.

We have applied for 14 new gTLDs, including 12 IDN gTLDs. Although we have been invited by ICANN to begin the contracting process for 12 of our 14 new gTLD applications, there is no certainty that we will ultimately obtain these gTLDs. ICANN has stated that it will need to limit the maximum number of new gTLDs that may be delegated in a year to 1,000, which could delay the activation of some approved new gTLDs. Even though IDN gTLDs have been given priority, other factors related to the application process could delay or disrupt an application and the timing of revenue generation, if any, from these gTLDs. Even if we are successful in obtaining one or more of these new gTLDs, there is no guarantee that such new gTLDs will be any more successful than the new gTLDs obtained by our competitors. For example, some of the gTLDs we have applied for face additional universal acceptability and usability challenges in that current desktop and mobile device software does not ubiquitously recognize these new gTLDs and may be slow to adopt standards or support these gTLDs, even if demand for such products is strong. This is particularly true for IDN TLDs, but applies to conventional gTLDs as well.
Similarly, while we originally entered into agreements to provide back-end registry services to other applicants for approximately 220 new gTLDs, and applicants for approximately 200 new gTLDs currently continue to contract with us to provide back-end registry services, there is no guarantee that such applicants with which we have entered into agreements will be successful in obtaining one or more of these new gTLDs or that such new gTLDs will be successful due to the same factors discussed above in connection with our gTLD applications. We also cannot guarantee that we will ultimately provide back-end registry services for such amount of new gTLDs. ICANN's Registry Agreement for new gTLDs requires the distribution of new gTLDs only through registrars who have executed the new Registry Accreditation Agreement (“RAA”). If registrars do not execute the new RAA, our ability to provide back-end services would be reduced, negatively impacting the sale of our back-end services for new gTLDs. Even if we are able to provide such services, the timing of revenue may also be dependent on how diligently our customers proceed to delegation and launch following the completion of the application process and our customers’ respective launch plans for the new gTLDs. In addition, our agreements to provide back-end registry services directly to other applicants and indirectly through reseller relationships expose us to operational and other risks. For example, the increase in the number of gTLDs for which we provide registry services on a standalone basis or as a back-end service provider could further increase costs or increase the frequency or scope of targeted attacks from nefarious actors.

We also face competition from service providers that offer outsourced domain name registration, resolution and other DNS services to organizations that require a reliable and scalable infrastructure. Among the competitors are Neustar, Inc., Afilias Limited, ARI Registry Services, Donuts Inc. and RightSide Inc. In addition, to the extent end-users navigate using search engines or social media, as opposed to direct navigation, we may face competition from search engine operators such as Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo!, operators of social networks such as Facebook, and operators of microblogging tools such as Twitter. Furthermore, to the extent end-users increase the use of web and phone applications to locate and access content, we may face competition from providers of such web and mobile applications.
Competition in NIA Services: Several of our current and potential competitors have longer operating histories and/or significantly greater financial, technical, marketing and other resources than we do and therefore may be able to respond more quickly than we can to new or changing opportunities, technologies, standards and customer requirements. Many of these competitors also have broader and more established distribution channels that may be used to deliver competing products or services directly to customers through bundling or other means. If such competitors were to bundle competing products or services for their customers, we may experience difficulty establishing or increasing demand for our products and services or distributing our products successfully. In addition, it may be difficult to compete against consolidation and partnerships among our competitors which create integrated product suites.

We face competition in the network intelligence and availability services industry from companies or services such as iSight Partners, IBM X-Force, Secunia ApS, Dell SecureWorks, McAfee, Inc., Prolexic Technologies, Inc., AT&T Inc., Verizon Communications, Inc., Dyn, Inc., Neustar, Inc., OpenDNS, BlueCat Networks, Inc., Infoblox Inc., Nominum, Inc., Afilias Limited and Akamai Technologies, Inc.


Overall company Market Share Q2 2022

With revenue growth of 6.83 % within Overall company, Verisign Inc achieved improvement in market share, within Overall company to approximate 0.37 %.
<<  More on VRSN Market Share.
*Market share is calculated based on total revenue.

VRSN's vs. Competition, Data

(Revenue and Income for Trailing 12 Months, in Millions of $, except Employees)

(in millions of $)
(in millions of $)
(in millions of $)
Verisign Inc VRSN 21,987.39 1,373.00 812.00 872
Adobe Inc. ADBE 210,802 16,693.00 4,889.00 22,516
Akamai Technologies Inc AKAM 15,516 3,572.67 578.15 7,724
Alpine 4 Holdings Inc. ALPP 181 68.56 -17.45 0
Cipherloc Corporation CLOK 11 0.03 -2.86 7
Salesforce Inc. CRM 190,080 22,700.00 3,631.00 49,000
Cisco Systems Inc. CSCO 194,364 51,581.00 12,006.00 77,500
Scandium International Mining Corp. EMC 0 0.00 -0.32 70,000
Symbolic Logic Inc EVOL 18 0.00 17.87 314
Hubspot Inc. HUBS 18,533 1,525.86 -95.81 2,081
International Business Machines Corporation IBM 122,043 64,050.00 5,588.00 381,100
Intel Corporation INTC 148,051 73,394.00 19,105.00 110,600
Leidos Holdings Inc. LDOS 13,799 14,065.00 733.00 34,000
Mcx Technologies Corp MCCX 2 0.69 -0.50 4
Mandiant Inc. MNDT 5,331 391.26 848.98 0
Marin Software Incorporated MRIN 31 21.90 -15.60 433
Nortonlifelock Inc. NLOK 14,611 2,817.00 855.00 3,600
Oracle Corporation ORCL 220,602 81,675.00 6,717.00 135,000
Qualys Inc. QLYS 5,932 448.03 101.60 869
Rapid7 Inc. RPD 3,971 616.37 -166.93 1,079
Sai.tech Global Corporation SAI 7 0.00 -2.55 0
Secureworks Corp SCWX 848 542.59 -37.11 2,555
Smith Micro Software Inc SMSI 128 59.78 -34.82 161
Splunk Inc. SPLK 18,409 2,401.42 -741.30 3,200
Synacor Inc SYNC 85 81.36 -11.56 320
Varonis Systems Inc. VRNS 3,386 434.64 -133.31 1,251
Willdan Group inc. WLDN 372 385.00 -8.15 637
Zim Corp ZIMFC 0 0.35 -0.01 5
At and t Inc. T 139,053 148,628.00 21,364.00 242,000
SUBTOTAL 1,348,148.23 487,526.85 75,977.81 1,146,828

Advance Monthly Sales

Consumer Price Index CPI

Producer Price Index PPI

Retail Inventories

Personal Income

Gross Domestic Product GDP

Money Supply

Industrial Production


Employment Situation

US International Trade

Factory Orders

Durable Goods

Construction Spending

Housing Starts

Vehicle Unit Sales


Event Calendar

PLNT's Profile

Stock Price

PLNT's Financials

Business Description


Charts & Quotes

PLNT's News


PLNT's Competitors

Customers & Markets

Economic Indicators

PLNT's Growth

Company Segments


Stock Performance

Growth Rates




Financial Strength


Largest Companies

Management Effectivness


At a Glance


Growth Rates



Financial Strength


At a Glance



Sectors & Industries






About us


Financial Terms

Technical Analysis

Fundamental Analysis

Energy Terms

Manufacturing Terms

Transportation Terms

Health Care

Insurance Terms

Economy Terms

Hotel & Leisure Terms

CSIMarket Company, Sector, Industry, Market Analysis, Stock Quotes, Earnings, Economy, News and Research.    Copyright © 2022 CSIMarket, Inc. All rights reserved. This site uses cookies to make your browsing experince better. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy - UPDATED (Read about our Privacy Policy)

Intraday data delayed per exchange requirements. All quotes are in local exchange time. Intraday data delayed 15 minutes for Nasdaq, and other exchanges. Fundamental and financial data for Stocks, Sector, Industry, and Economic Indicators provided by CSIMarket.com
CSIMarket.com 1500 N. University Drive, Coral Springs, FL 33071