ACAD vs VRNA Stock Comparison
Compare ACAD and VRNA across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between ACAD and VRNA?
ACAD leads the current stock comparison as ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. vs Verona Pharma plc
ACAD leads
ACAD leads by 25 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Value.
Stable: 4 of 5 evidence groups support ACAD, and its current signal state is conflicted.
ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Verona Pharma plc
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ACAD over VRNA, 68 versus 43 as of Sep 11, 2026. ACAD's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and value. 4 of 5 covered evidence groups favor ACAD today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. ACAD lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 25 points over 30 sessions.
Compare ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Verona Pharma plc across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price-return comparison using available daily close history.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000
Based on available close-price history. Distribution reinvestment is not added unless already reflected in the source series.
Compare ACAD and VRNA against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
AIQ Factor Divergence
Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.
- Quality92 vs 47ACAD +45
- Value57 vs 34ACAD +23
- Risk Resilience69 vs 54ACAD +15
4 of 5 evidence groups favor ACAD. ACAD’s edge is concentrated in quality and value.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Momentum +6
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
ACAD's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ACAD and VRNA both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ACAD (ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and value.
VRNA (Verona Pharma plc): the counter-case, on fundamentals.
Which one fits your objective
The same two names rank differently depending on what you are optimizing for. All six reads are shown at once — none of them is hidden behind a toggle.
Balanced
ACADACAD on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
VRNAVRNA on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
ACADACAD on the peer-relative Value factor, by 23 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
ACADACAD on Risk Resilience, by 15 points.
Analyst upside
ACADACAD on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | ACAD | VRNA | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +21.1% | +0.1% | ACAD has more room |
| Target dispersion | +102.3% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 9 | 1 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 5 covered evidence groups favor ACAD. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | ACAD | 68 vs 43 |
| Fundamentals | VRNAon balance | revenue growth 14.9% vs 27.3%; EPS growth 8% vs 166.8%; TTM ROE 32.4% vs -1.6%; gross margin 91.1% vs 95.5%; operating margin 7.6% vs 1.3% — VRNA takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | ACAD | Value 57 vs 34 |
| Technicals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Risk Resilience | ACAD | Risk Resilience 69 vs 54 |
| Analyst expectations | ACAD | Target upside 21.1% vs 0.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ACAD and VRNA and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 25 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 4 of 5 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on ACAD.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10ACAD lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 25 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- ACAD +25
- 68 vs 43
- 7 sessions ago
- ACAD +26
- 69 vs 43
- 30 sessions ago
- ACAD +26
- 74 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- ACAD +26
- 74 vs 48
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (11.82%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
No active signals
ACAD leads the comparison while carrying a conflicted signal state, which is one reason the stability rating is not higher.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.32%, AIQ +2 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1VRNA closes the Quality gap — currently 45 points behind, the largest single contributor to ACAD's edge.
- 2VRNA generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3ACAD's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Fundamentals
VRNA leads on balance| Metric | ACAD | VRNA |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 14.9% | 27.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 8% | 166.8% |
| Gross margin | 91.1% | 95.5% |
| Operating margin | 7.6% | 1.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 32.4% | -1.6% |
| Debt to equity | 0.06 | 0.88 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | ACAD | VRNA |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -4.1% | — |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -5.8% | — |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 30.5% | — |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 26.3% | — |
| Year to date | 3.9% | — |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 9.3% | — |
Technicals
Split| Metric | ACAD | VRNA |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 37.9 | — |
| ADX (14) | 25.9 | — |
| Price vs 50-day | 1.5% | — |
| Price vs 200-day | 13.1% | — |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 35.5% | — |
Risk
ACAD is the more resilient| Metric | ACAD | VRNA |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.84 | — |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.38 | 2.17 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.61 | 3.11 |
| Max drawdown | -27.6% | -0.4% |
| Current drawdown | -9.3% | 0% |
| Annualized volatility | 38% | 2.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.5% | -0.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ACAD or VRNA?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ACAD is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 68 against VRNA's 43. The edge comes from quality and value. This is a systematic score, not a recommendation: it ranks the two on the same evidence, it does not know your holding period or tax position.
Is ACAD or VRNA the better buy right now?
ACAD carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 4 of 5 covered evidence groups agree. A Stable rating means the gap is wide and the evidence is broad, so the conclusion is unlikely to turn on a single session.
Why does the AIQ Score favor ACAD over VRNA?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. ACAD leads Quality by 45 points; ACAD leads Value by 23 points; ACAD leads Risk Resilience by 15 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ACAD or VRNA?
Analyst price targets imply +21.1% upside for ACAD and +0.1% for VRNA, so the Street currently favors ACAD. The model and the Street agree here, which is a broader base of evidence than either alone. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, ACAD or VRNA?
ACAD is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. ACAD on the peer-relative Value factor, by 23 points. The Value factor reads valuation relative to sector peers and to the company's own fundamental quality, so it is not the same as simply having the lower multiple.
Which has stronger growth, ACAD or VRNA?
VRNA on combined revenue and EPS growth. Growth here is measured on reported revenue and earnings, not on forward estimates — it describes what the businesses have delivered, not what the Street expects next.
Which has stronger momentum, ACAD or VRNA?
The two are level on Momentum. Momentum is one of the four weighted factors in the AIQ composite. It has documented persistence over three- to twelve-month horizons, which makes it a timing input rather than a reason to hold something indefinitely.
Which is riskier, ACAD or VRNA?
ACAD is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ACAD on Risk Resilience, by 15 points. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is ACAD more profitable than VRNA?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 91.1% vs 95.5%; operating margin 7.6% vs 1.3%; ttm roe 32.4% vs -1.6%. ACAD leads on two measures and VRNA on one measure, and there is no single profitability composite that resolves the split — which of the two reads as "more profitable" depends on whether you weight pricing power or operating leverage.
Is ACAD's lead over VRNA getting stronger or weaker?
ACAD lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 25 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the ACAD vs VRNA verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: VRNA closes the Quality gap — currently 45 points behind, the largest single contributor to ACAD's edge; VRNA generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover; ACAD's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about ACAD and VRNA?
ACAD: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. VRNA: No active signals. A conflicted state means bullish and bearish rules are active on the same name at once — the technical evidence is not pointing one way, and a decision taken on it carries more timing risk. The most decision-relevant rule on ACAD is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare ACAD and VRNA with others
Continue your research
This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.