CIFR vs CRCL Stock Comparison
CRCL currently leads CIFR in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 40 vs 20. The clearest difference is quality, while CIFR has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between CIFR and CRCL?
CRCL leads the current stock comparison as Circle Internet Group, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Cipher Mining Inc. vs Circle Internet Group
CRCL leads
CRCL leads by 20 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 15 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors CIFR on target upside.
Stable: 4 of 6 evidence groups support CRCL, and its lead is widening.
Cipher Mining Inc.
Circle Internet Group
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CRCL over CIFR, 40 versus 20 as of Oct 21, 2026. CRCL's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while CIFR holds the stronger value profile. CRCL also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors CIFR. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CRCL today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. CRCL lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 20 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Cipher Mining Inc. and Circle Internet Group 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 CIFR and CRCL 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.
- Quality0 vs 53CRCL +53
- Momentum24 vs 46CRCL +22
- Value34 vs 24CIFR +10
- Risk Resilience25 vs 33CRCL +8
4 of 6 evidence groups favor CRCL. CRCL’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; CIFR keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 7 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +8
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
CRCL's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CIFR and CRCL both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CRCL (Circle Internet Group): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
CIFR (Cipher Mining Inc.): the counter-case, on value, valuation, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 72.1% against 60.6%.
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
CRCLCRCL on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CRCLCRCL on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CIFRCIFR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 points.
Momentum
CRCLCRCL on the Momentum factor, by 22 points.
Lower downside
CRCLCRCL on Risk Resilience, by 8 points.
Analyst upside
CIFRCIFR on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors CRCL, analyst targets favor CIFR. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | CIFR | CRCL | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +298% | +1.8% | CIFR has more room |
| Target dispersion | +99.1% | +123.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 9 | 14 | 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 CRCL. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | CRCL | 20 vs 40 |
| Fundamentals | CRCL | revenue growth -28.7% vs 1%; EPS growth -132.1% vs -17.4%; TTM ROE -156.3% vs 13.6%; gross margin -20% vs 20%; operating margin -202.9% vs 8.2% |
| Valuation | CIFR | Value 34 vs 24 |
| Technicals | CRCL | Price vs 50-day -41.5% vs 4.2%; vs 200-day -50.7% vs -0.3% |
| Risk Resilience | CRCL | Risk Resilience 25 vs 33 |
| Analyst expectations | CIFR | Target upside 298% vs 1.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CIFR and CRCL 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 20 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 CRCL.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20CRCL lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 20 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- CRCL +20
- 20 vs 40
- 7 sessions ago
- CRCL +23
- 20 vs 43
- 30 sessions ago
- CRCL +15
- 24 vs 39
- 90 sessions ago
- CRCL +13
- 34 vs 47
The lead changed hands 7 times in this window, most recently on Aug 4 when CRCL moved ahead of CIFR.
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.
1 bullish / 5 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only CIFR
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (0.0%)
0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral
No signal that the other name lacks.
Both carry 4 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode, Downtrend Structure Active, MACD Bearish Crossover.
CIFR is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
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 +2.82%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +4.47%, 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.
- 1CIFR closes the Quality gap — currently 53 points behind, the largest single contributor to CRCL's edge.
- 2CIFR's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3CRCL starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 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
CRCL leads on balance| Metric | CIFR | CRCL |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -28.7% | 1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -132.1% | -17.4% |
| Gross margin | -20% | 20% |
| Operating margin | -202.9% | 8.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -156.3% | 13.6% |
| Debt to equity | 9.94 | 0 |
Performance
CRCL leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | CIFR | CRCL |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -21.7% | 1.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -41.9% | -9.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -50.8% | 29.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -50.8% | -10.6% |
| Year to date | -32.6% | 8.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -52.6% | -33.2% |
Technicals
CRCL has the stronger structure| Metric | CIFR | CRCL |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 5 | 55.2 |
| ADX (14) | 28.8 | 12.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | -41.5% | 4.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | -50.7% | -0.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 72.1% | 60.6% |
Risk
CRCL is the more resilient| Metric | CIFR | CRCL |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 4.07 | 2.95 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.15 | 0.03 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.28 | 0.05 |
| Max drawdown | -69.6% | -64.6% |
| Current drawdown | -69.6% | -39.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 113% | 96.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -10.9% | -8.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CIFR or CRCL?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CRCL is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 40 against CIFR's 20. The edge comes from quality and momentum. CIFR 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 CIFR or CRCL the better buy right now?
CRCL carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 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 CRCL over CIFR?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CRCL leads Quality by 53 points; CRCL leads Momentum by 22 points; CIFR leads Value by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CIFR or CRCL?
Analyst price targets imply +298% upside for CIFR and +1.8% for CRCL, so the Street currently favors CIFR. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors CRCL. 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, CIFR or CRCL?
CIFR is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CIFR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 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, CIFR or CRCL?
CRCL 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, CIFR or CRCL?
CRCL on the Momentum factor, by 22 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, CIFR or CRCL?
CRCL is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CRCL on Risk Resilience, by 8 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 CIFR more profitable than CRCL?
CRCL leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin -20% vs 20%; operating margin -202.9% vs 8.2%; ttm roe -156.3% vs 13.6%.
Is CRCL's lead over CIFR getting stronger or weaker?
CRCL lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 20 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 7 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-04, when CRCL moved ahead of CIFR.
What would change the CIFR vs CRCL verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CIFR closes the Quality gap — currently 53 points behind, the largest single contributor to CRCL's edge; CIFR's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; CRCL starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; 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 CIFR and CRCL?
CIFR: 1 bullish / 5 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. CRCL: 0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral. 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 CIFR is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On CRCL it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare CIFR and CRCL 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.