CLSK vs CRCL Stock Comparison
Compare CLSK and CRCL across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between CLSK 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
CleanSpark, Inc. vs Circle Internet Group
CRCL leads
CRCL leads by 17 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, but the lead has narrowed from 21 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors CLSK on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support CRCL, and its lead is narrowing.
CleanSpark, Inc.
Circle Internet Group
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CRCL over CLSK, 45 versus 28 as of Sep 11, 2026. CRCL's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while CLSK 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 CLSK. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CRCL today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. CRCL lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 21 to 17 points over 30 sessions.
Compare CleanSpark, Inc. and Circle Internet Group 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 CLSK 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
- Momentum50 vs 66CRCL +16
- Value39 vs 24CLSK +15
- Risk Resilience27 vs 33CRCL +6
4 of 6 evidence groups favor CRCL. CRCL’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; CLSK keeps a meaningful value edge.
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 -21
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -6
New signals
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
CRCL's lead widened by 5 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CLSK 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.
CLSK (CleanSpark, Inc.): the counter-case, on value, valuation, analyst expectations.
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
CLSKCLSK on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CLSKCLSK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 points.
Momentum
CRCLCRCL on the Momentum factor, by 16 points.
Lower downside
CRCLCRCL on Risk Resilience, by 6 points.
Analyst upside
CLSKCLSK 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 CLSK. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | CLSK | CRCL | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +41.4% | -1.4% | CLSK has more room |
| Target dispersion | +62.1% | +126.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 2 | 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 | 28 vs 45 |
| Fundamentals | CRCLon balance | revenue growth 1.2% vs 1%; EPS growth 41.4% vs -17.4%; TTM ROE -75.2% vs 13.6%; gross margin -5.3% vs 20%; operating margin -79.4% vs 8.2% — CRCL takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | CLSK | Value 39 vs 24 |
| Technicals | CRCL | Price vs 50-day 5.8% vs 22.7%; vs 200-day 1.8% vs 5.7% |
| Risk Resilience | CRCL | Risk Resilience 27 vs 33 |
| Analyst expectations | CLSK | Target upside 41.4% vs -1.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CLSK and CRCL 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 wide at 17 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. (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 CRCL.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10CRCL lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 21 to 17 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- CRCL +17
- 28 vs 45
- 7 sessions ago
- CRCL +21
- 28 vs 49
- 30 sessions ago
- CRCL +21
- 27 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- CRCL +8
- 27 vs 35
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Jun 1 when CLSK moved ahead of CRCL.
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 / 0 bearish / 2 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (2.83%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (7.76%)
0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (15.72%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (7.13%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
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 up while the AIQ Score moved down 6 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +6.8%, AIQ -6 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.31%, AIQ -1 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.
- 1CLSK closes the Quality gap — currently 53 points behind, the largest single contributor to CRCL's edge.
- 2CLSK's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3CRCL starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 17-point move would eliminate CRCL'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
CRCL leads on balance| Metric | CLSK | CRCL |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 1.2% | 1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 41.4% | -17.4% |
| Gross margin | -5.3% | 20% |
| Operating margin | -79.4% | 8.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -75.2% | 13.6% |
| Debt to equity | 2.34 | 0 |
Performance
CLSK leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | CLSK | CRCL |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 13% | 1.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 5.1% | 26.7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -14.1% | 14.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 30.5% | -19.9% |
| Year to date | 26.5% | 13.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 39.6% | -19.7% |
Technicals
CRCL has the stronger structure| Metric | CLSK | CRCL |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 51.3 | 55.1 |
| ADX (14) | 11.9 | 36.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | 5.8% | 22.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | 1.8% | 5.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 88.2% | 101.7% |
Risk
CRCL is the more resilient| Metric | CLSK | CRCL |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 3.47 | 3.06 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.72 | 0.17 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.36 | 0.3 |
| Max drawdown | -64.7% | -66.6% |
| Current drawdown | -44.8% | -40% |
| Annualized volatility | 95.2% | 98.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -7.8% | -8.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CLSK or CRCL?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CRCL is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 45 against CLSK's 28. The edge comes from quality and momentum. CLSK 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 CLSK or CRCL the better buy right now?
CRCL carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 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 CRCL over CLSK?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CRCL leads Quality by 53 points; CRCL leads Momentum by 16 points; CLSK leads Value by 15 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CLSK or CRCL?
Analyst price targets imply +41.4% upside for CLSK and -1.4% for CRCL, so the Street currently favors CLSK. 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, CLSK or CRCL?
CLSK is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CLSK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 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, CLSK or CRCL?
CLSK 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, CLSK or CRCL?
CRCL on the Momentum factor, by 16 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, CLSK or CRCL?
CRCL is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CRCL on Risk Resilience, by 6 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 CLSK more profitable than CRCL?
CRCL leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin -5.3% vs 20%; operating margin -79.4% vs 8.2%; ttm roe -75.2% vs 13.6%.
Is CRCL's lead over CLSK getting stronger or weaker?
CRCL lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 21 to 17 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-06-01, when CLSK moved ahead of CRCL.
What would change the CLSK vs CRCL verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CLSK closes the Quality gap — currently 53 points behind, the largest single contributor to CRCL's edge; CLSK's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; CRCL starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 17-point move would eliminate CRCL's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about CLSK and CRCL?
CLSK: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral. CRCL: 0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral. The most decision-relevant rule on CLSK is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On CRCL it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare CLSK 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.