AVGO vs FICO Stock Comparison
Broadcom Inc. vs Fair Isaac Corporation
AVGO leads
AVGO leads by 8 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience, but the lead has narrowed from 23 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors FICO on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support AVGO, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Broadcom Inc.
Fair Isaac Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors AVGO over FICO, 47 versus 39 as of Sep 5, 2026. AVGO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while FICO holds the stronger value profile. AVGO also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors FICO. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor AVGO today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. AVGO lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 23 to 8 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Broadcom Inc. and Fair Isaac Corporation across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare AVGO and FICO 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.
- Quality30%85 vs 60AVGO +25
- Risk Resilience15%53 vs 29AVGO +24
- Value30%30 vs 46FICO +16
- Momentum25%20 vs 13AVGO +7
4 of 6 evidence groups favor AVGO. AVGO’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; FICO keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-04, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-03.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience +1
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -41
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (1.7%)
The lead changed hands: AVGO moved ahead of FICO in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AVGO and FICO both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
AVGO (Broadcom Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
FICO (Fair Isaac Corporation): the counter-case, on value, valuation, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 74.8% against 35.2%.
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
AVGOAVGO on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
AVGOAVGO on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
FICOFICO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 16 points.
Momentum
AVGOAVGO on the Momentum factor, by 7 points.
Lower downside
AVGOAVGO on Risk Resilience, by 24 points.
Analyst upside
FICOFICO on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors AVGO, analyst targets favor FICO. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | AVGO | FICO | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +40.1% | +60.4% | FICO has more room |
| Target dispersion | +36.3% | +54.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 15 | 9 | 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 AVGO. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | AVGO | 47 vs 39 |
| Fundamentals | AVGOon balance | revenue growth 14.9% vs -2.5%; EPS growth 26.5% vs -6.5%; TTM ROE 36.4% vs -33.4%; gross margin 67% vs 85.1%; operating margin 43.7% vs 51.7% — AVGO takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | FICO | Value 30 vs 46 |
| Technicals | AVGO | Price vs 50-day -6.7% vs -20.2%; vs 200-day -3.2% vs -28.5% |
| Risk Resilience | AVGO | Risk Resilience 53 vs 29 |
| Analyst expectations | FICO | Target upside 40.1% vs 60.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AVGO and FICO and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is moderate at 8 points.
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has swung materially session to session. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (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 AVGO.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 23 – Sep 4AVGO lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 23 to 8 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- AVGO +8
- 47 vs 39
- 7 sessions ago
- FICO +10
- 45 vs 55
- 30 sessions ago
- AVGO +23
- 64 vs 41
- 90 sessions ago
- FICO +3
- 50 vs 53
The lead changed hands 10 times in this window, most recently on Sep 4 when AVGO moved ahead of FICO.
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.
2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (3.74%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.64%)
1 bullish / 5 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (11.73%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
AVGO 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.21%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -16.68%, AIQ -12 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.
- 1FICO closes the Quality gap — currently 25 points behind, the largest single contributor to AVGO's edge.
- 2FICO's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3AVGO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 15 points over 30 sessions, and a further 8-point move would eliminate AVGO's advantage entirely.
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
AVGO leads on balance| Metric | AVGO | FICO |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 14.9% | -2.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 26.5% | -6.5% |
| Gross margin | 67% | 85.1% |
| Operating margin | 43.7% | 51.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 36.4% | -33.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.74 | -1.37 |
Performance
AVGO leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | AVGO | FICO |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -3% | -19.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -16.3% | -10.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -7.2% | -18% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 8.3% | -36.8% |
| Year to date | 3.4% | -42% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 18.4% | -38.7% |
Technicals
AVGO has the stronger structure| Metric | AVGO | FICO |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 29.2 | 35.6 |
| ADX (14) | 23.7 | 13 |
| Price vs 50-day | -6.7% | -20.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | -3.2% | -28.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 35.2% | 74.8% |
Risk
AVGO is the more resilient| Metric | AVGO | FICO |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.15 | 0.42 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.48 | -0.64 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.73 | -0.75 |
| Max drawdown | -28.9% | -50.9% |
| Current drawdown | -25.7% | -50.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 48.4% | 56.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.4% | -6.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AVGO or FICO?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, AVGO is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 47 against FICO's 39. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. FICO is not without a case — it holds the better value profile, which matters more if that is the objective you are optimizing for. 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 AVGO or FICO the better buy right now?
AVGO carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor AVGO over FICO?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. AVGO leads Quality by 25 points; AVGO leads Risk Resilience by 24 points; FICO leads Value by 16 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AVGO or FICO?
Analyst price targets imply +40.1% upside for AVGO and +60.4% for FICO, so the Street currently favors FICO. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors AVGO. 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, AVGO or FICO?
FICO is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. FICO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 16 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, AVGO or FICO?
AVGO 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, AVGO or FICO?
AVGO on the Momentum factor, by 7 points. Momentum carries 25% of 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, AVGO or FICO?
AVGO is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. AVGO on Risk Resilience, by 24 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is AVGO more profitable than FICO?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 67% vs 85.1%; operating margin 43.7% vs 51.7%; ttm roe 36.4% vs -33.4%. AVGO leads on one measure and FICO on two measures, 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 AVGO's lead over FICO getting stronger or weaker?
AVGO lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 23 to 8 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-23 and 2026-09-04. The lead has changed hands 10 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-04, when AVGO moved ahead of FICO.
What would change the AVGO vs FICO verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: FICO closes the Quality gap — currently 25 points behind, the largest single contributor to AVGO's edge; FICO's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; AVGO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 15 points over 30 sessions, and a further 8-point move would eliminate AVGO's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about AVGO and FICO?
AVGO: 2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. FICO: 1 bullish / 5 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. 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 AVGO is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On FICO it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare AVGO and FICO with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.