Comparison Overview

Raymond James

VS

Global Payments Inc.

Raymond James

880 Carillon Parkway, None, St. Petersburg, Florida, US, 33716
Last Update: 2025-12-01
Between 750 and 799

Founded in 1962 and a public company since 1983, Raymond James Financial, Inc. is a Florida-based diversified holding company providing financial services to individuals, corporations and municipalities through its subsidiary companies engaged primarily in investment and financial planning, in addition to capital markets and asset management. The firm's stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange (RJF). Through its three broker/dealer subsidiaries, Raymond James Financial has approximately 8,700 financial advisors throughout the United States, Canada and overseas. Total client assets are $1.26 trillion (as of 10/25/2023). Raymond James has been recognized nationally for its community support and corporate philanthropy. The company has been ranked as one of the best in the country in customer service, as a great place to work and as a national leader in support of the arts.

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 18,671
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Global Payments Inc.

None, None, Atlanta, Georgia, US, None
Last Update: 2025-12-01

Global Payments (NYSE : GPN) helps businesses around the world enable commerce and provide exceptional experiences to their customers. Our payment technology and software solutions enable merchants and developers to deliver seamless customer experiences, run smarter operations and adapt quickly to change. Because if it has anything to do with commerce, we are already on it. With 27,000 team members across 38 countries, we have the scale and expertise to help businesses grow with confidence. Headquartered in Georgia, Global Payments is a Fortune 500® company and a member of the S&P 500. Learn more at company.globalpayments.com and follow us on LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram and X.

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 24,185
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/raymond-james-financial-inc-.jpeg
Raymond James
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/global-payments.jpeg
Global Payments Inc.
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Raymond James
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Global Payments Inc.
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Raymond James in 2025.

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Global Payments Inc. in 2025.

Incident History — Raymond James (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Raymond James cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Global Payments Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Global Payments Inc. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/raymond-james-financial-inc-.jpeg
Raymond James
Incidents

Date Detected: 7/2023
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Misconfiguration
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/global-payments.jpeg
Global Payments Inc.
Incidents

Date Detected: 7/2012
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 7/2012
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Global Payments Inc. company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Raymond James company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Global Payments Inc. company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Raymond James company.

In the current year, Global Payments Inc. company and Raymond James company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Global Payments Inc. company nor Raymond James company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both Global Payments Inc. company and Raymond James company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Neither Global Payments Inc. company nor Raymond James company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Raymond James company nor Global Payments Inc. company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Raymond James nor Global Payments Inc. holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Both Global Payments Inc. company and Raymond James company have a similar number of subsidiaries worldwide.

Global Payments Inc. company employs more people globally than Raymond James company, reflecting its scale as a Financial Services.

Neither Raymond James nor Global Payments Inc. holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Raymond James nor Global Payments Inc. holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Raymond James nor Global Payments Inc. holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Raymond James nor Global Payments Inc. holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Raymond James nor Global Payments Inc. holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Raymond James nor Global Payments Inc. holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Sigstore Timestamp Authority is a service for issuing RFC 3161 timestamps. Prior to 2.0.3, Function api.ParseJSONRequest currently splits (via a call to strings.Split) an optionally-provided OID (which is untrusted data) on periods. Similarly, function api.getContentType splits the Content-Type header (which is also untrusted data) on an application string. As a result, in the face of a malicious request with either an excessively long OID in the payload containing many period characters or a malformed Content-Type header, a call to api.ParseJSONRequest or api.getContentType incurs allocations of O(n) bytes (where n stands for the length of the function's argument). This vulnerability is fixed in 2.0.3.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Monkeytype is a minimalistic and customizable typing test. In 25.49.0 and earlier, there is improper handling of user input which allows an attacker to execute malicious javascript on anyone viewing a malicious quote submission. quote.text and quote.source are user input, and they're inserted straight into the DOM. If they contain HTML tags, they will be rendered (after some escaping using quotes and textarea tags).

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

SysReptor is a fully customizable pentest reporting platform. Prior to 2025.102, there is a Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability allows authenticated users to execute malicious JavaScript in the context of other logged-in users by uploading malicious JavaScript files in the web UI. This vulnerability is fixed in 2025.102.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Description

Taiko Alethia is an Ethereum-equivalent, permissionless, based rollup designed to scale Ethereum without compromising its fundamental properties. In 2.3.1 and earlier, TaikoInbox._verifyBatches (packages/protocol/contracts/layer1/based/TaikoInbox.sol:627-678) advanced the local tid to whatever transition matched the current blockHash before knowing whether that batch would actually be verified. When the loop later broke (e.g., cooldown window not yet passed or transition invalidated), the function still wrote that newer tid into batches[lastVerifiedBatchId].verifiedTransitionId after decrementing batchId. Result: the last verified batch could end up pointing at a transition index from the next batch (often zeroed), corrupting the verified chain pointer.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

A flaw has been found in youlaitech youlai-mall 1.0.0/2.0.0. Affected is the function getById/updateAddress/deleteAddress of the file /mall-ums/app-api/v1/addresses/. Executing manipulation can lead to improper control of dynamically-identified variables. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit has been published and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X