API vs COMP Stock Comparison
API currently leads COMP in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 62 vs 31. The clearest difference is risk resilience.
What is the main difference between API and COMP?
API leads the current stock comparison as Agora, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Agora, Inc. vs Compass, Inc.
API leads
API leads by 31 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Quality, and the lead has widened from 28 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors COMP on target upside.
Stable: 4 of 6 evidence groups support API, its lead is widening, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Agora, Inc.
Compass, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors API over COMP, 62 versus 31 as of Oct 31, 2026. API's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and quality. API also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors COMP. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor API today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability. API lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 28 to 31 points over 30 sessions. API leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so a sweep is not explained by valuation alone — it deserves additional scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, expectations or event risk.
Compare Agora, Inc. and Compass, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price return from daily closes; distributions are not included.
Price return comparison
Growth of $10,000, price only
Split-adjusted closes only. Distributions are excluded, which understates the return of any fund or stock that pays them.
Compare API and COMP 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.
- Risk Resilience64 vs 19API +45
- Quality58 vs 19API +39
- Momentum77 vs 38API +39
- Value53 vs 42API +11
4 of 6 evidence groups favor API. API’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and quality.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum +4
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -10
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
API's lead widened by 3 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — API and COMP both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
API (Agora, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and quality.
COMP (Compass, Inc.): the counter-case, on analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 59.5% against 39.3%.
The AIQ Score and Wall Street therefore point in different directions on this pair.
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
APIAPI on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
APIAPI on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
APIAPI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 points.
Momentum
APIAPI on the Momentum factor, by 39 points.
Lower downside
APIAPI on Risk Resilience, by 45 points.
Analyst upside
COMPCOMP on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors API, analyst targets favor COMP. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | API | COMP | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -40.1% | +50% | COMP has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +59.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 6 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
The two are measuring different things. The AIQ Score reads current fundamentals, valuation, trend and risk; analyst targets price forward expectations. A divergence of this kind is either a contrarian opportunity or a sign the model is missing something already priced in — it is worth resolving before acting on either.
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor API. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | API | 62 vs 31 |
| Fundamentals | Even | revenue growth 6.9% vs 59.2%; EPS growth 103.1% vs 4.3%; TTM ROE 2% vs 3.6%; gross margin 64.5% vs 12.7% |
| Valuation | API | Value 53 vs 42 |
| Technicals | API | Price vs 50-day 4.1% vs -10.4%; vs 200-day 7.4% vs -7.8% |
| Risk Resilience | API | Risk Resilience 64 vs 19 |
| Analyst expectations | COMP | Target upside -40.1% vs 50% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of API and COMP 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 31 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
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 API.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28API lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 28 to 31 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- API +31
- 62 vs 31
- 7 sessions ago
- API +28
- 61 vs 33
- 30 sessions ago
- API +28
- 56 vs 28
- 90 sessions ago
- API +22
- 52 vs 30
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.
4 bullish / 0 bearish
Only API
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral
Only COMP
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (5.22%)
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.35%, AIQ +1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -4.15%, 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.
- 1COMP closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 45 points behind, the largest single contributor to API's edge.
- 2COMP's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3API's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 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
Split| Metric | API | COMP |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 6.9% | 59.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 103.1% | 4.3% |
| Gross margin | 64.5% | 12.7% |
| Operating margin | -4.3% | -0.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 2% | 3.6% |
| Debt to equity | 0.18 | 1.38 |
Performance
API leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | API | COMP |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.7% | -5.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 6.7% | 3.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 12.1% | -20% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 27.1% | 20.3% |
| Year to date | 9.6% | -13.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 23.9% | 14.2% |
Technicals
API has the stronger structure| Metric | API | COMP |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 67.8 | 45.7 |
| ADX (14) | 24.5 | 20.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | 4.1% | -10.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | 7.4% | -7.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 39.3% | 59.5% |
Risk
API is the more resilient| Metric | API | COMP |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.91 | 2.38 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.65 | 0.48 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.21 | 0.87 |
| Max drawdown | -29% | -50.8% |
| Current drawdown | -15.2% | -32.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 49.6% | 66.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.6% | -5.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, API or COMP?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, API is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 62 against COMP's 31. The edge comes from risk resilience and quality. 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 API or COMP the better buy right now?
API carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 4 of 6 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 API over COMP?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. API leads Risk Resilience by 45 points; API leads Quality by 39 points; API leads Momentum by 39 points. API leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so the sweep is not explained by COMP simply being cheaper — it warrants extra scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, forward expectations or event risk the factors do not capture.
Which has more analyst upside, API or COMP?
Analyst price targets imply -40.1% upside for API and +50% for COMP, so the Street currently favors COMP. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors API. The two are measuring different things: the model reads current fundamentals, valuation, trend and risk; the Street is pricing forward expectations. A divergence of this kind is either a contrarian opportunity or a sign the model is missing something the analysts have already priced — it is the single most useful row on this page to investigate. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, API or COMP?
API is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. API on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 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, API or COMP?
API 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, API or COMP?
API on the Momentum factor, by 39 points. 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, API or COMP?
API is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. API on Risk Resilience, by 45 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 API more profitable than COMP?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 64.5% vs 12.7%; operating margin -4.3% vs -0.7%; ttm roe 2% vs 3.6%. Each name leads 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 API's lead over COMP getting stronger or weaker?
API lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 28 to 31 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the API vs COMP verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: COMP closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 45 points behind, the largest single contributor to API's edge; COMP's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; API's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; 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 API and COMP?
API: 4 bullish / 0 bearish. COMP: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral. The most decision-relevant rule on API is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On COMP it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare API and COMP 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.