COF vs FITB Stock Comparison
COF currently leads FITB in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 61 vs 54. The clearest difference is value.
What is the main difference between COF and FITB?
COF leads the current stock comparison as Capital One Financial Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Capital One Financial Corporation vs Fifth Third Bancorp
COF leads
COF leads by 7 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality.
Competitive: 3 of 6 evidence groups support COF, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Capital One Financial Corporation
Fifth Third Bancorp
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors COF over FITB, 61 versus 54 as of Oct 22, 2026. COF's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality. COF also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor COF today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. COF lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 7 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Capital One Financial Corporation and Fifth Third Bancorp across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare COF and FITB 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.
- Value60 vs 38COF +22
- Quality63 vs 59COF +4
- Momentum59 vs 61Even
- Risk Resilience62 vs 63Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor COF. COF’s edge is concentrated in value and quality.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +9
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 2 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +23
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
COF's lead narrowed by 4 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — COF and FITB both carry a full feed there.
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
COFCOF on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
COFCOF on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
COFCOF on the peer-relative Value factor, by 22 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
EvenDownside measures are level or not covered.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | COF | FITB | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +18.8% | +19.1% | Level |
| Target dispersion | +24.9% | +14.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 9 | 7 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | COF | FITB |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 21.06% | 7.35% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $1.000 | $1.080 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $2.600 | $1.540 |
| Years increased | 3 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | #171 |
COF grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 21.06% a year against FITB's 7.35%. Neither company reduced its regular dividend in any year of the window.
Yield and payout ratio shown elsewhere on this page are current values, not part of the study window.
Split-adjusted regular dividends per share, 2020–2025, excluding special dividends. Research as of Sep 19, 2026.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor COF. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | COF | 61 vs 54 |
| Fundamentals | COFon balance | revenue growth 2.8% vs 14.6%; EPS growth 41.6% vs 4.2%; TTM ROE 9.3% vs 8.4%; gross margin 66.2% vs 68.5%; operating margin 21% vs 20.1% — COF takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | COF | Value 60 vs 38 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day -0.3% vs -0.9%; vs 200-day -0.6% vs 1.1% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 62 vs 63 |
| Analyst expectations | Even | Target upside 18.8% vs 19.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of COF and FITB and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is moderate at 7 points.
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (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 COF.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20COF lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 7 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- COF +7
- 61 vs 54
- 7 sessions ago
- COF +10
- 57 vs 47
- 30 sessions ago
- COF +7
- 52 vs 45
- 90 sessions ago
- COF +11
- 65 vs 54
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.
2 bullish / 0 bearish
No signal that the other name lacks.
2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only FITB
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
FITB 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.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +2.53%, AIQ +2 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.76%, AIQ +6 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.
- 1FITB closes the Value gap — currently 22 points behind, the largest single contributor to COF's edge.
- 2FITB's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3COF'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
COF leads on balance| Metric | COF | FITB |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 2.8% | 14.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 41.6% | 4.2% |
| Gross margin | 66.2% | 68.5% |
| Operating margin | 21% | 20.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 9.3% | 8.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.4 | 0.65 |
Performance
FITB leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | COF | FITB |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.8% | 4.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 0.5% | -0.7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 0.1% | -9.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -0.5% | 2.6% |
| Year to date | -16.8% | 12% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -0.8% | 29.9% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | COF | FITB |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 66.2 | 64 |
| ADX (14) | 19.9 | 32.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | -0.3% | -0.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | -0.6% | 1.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 21.4% | 21% |
Risk
Split| Metric | COF | FITB |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.27 | 0.74 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.12 | 0.96 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.15 | 1.39 |
| Max drawdown | -31.7% | -21.2% |
| Current drawdown | -21.9% | -11.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 31.2% | 25.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.2% | -2.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, COF or FITB?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, COF is the stronger of the two as of Oct 22, 2026, scoring 61 against FITB's 54. The edge comes from value 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 COF or FITB the better buy right now?
COF carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 22, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor COF over FITB?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. COF leads Value by 22 points; COF leads Quality by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, COF or FITB?
Analyst price targets imply +18.8% upside for COF and +19.1% for FITB. 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, COF or FITB?
COF is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. COF on the peer-relative Value factor, by 22 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, COF or FITB?
COF 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, COF or FITB?
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, COF or FITB?
The two are close on downside measures. Downside measures are level or not covered. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is COF more profitable than FITB?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 66.2% vs 68.5%; operating margin 21% vs 20.1%; ttm roe 9.3% vs 8.4%. COF leads on two measures and FITB 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 COF's lead over FITB getting stronger or weaker?
COF lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 7 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the COF vs FITB verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: FITB closes the Value gap — currently 22 points behind, the largest single contributor to COF's edge; FITB's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; COF'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 COF and FITB?
COF: 2 bullish / 0 bearish. FITB: 2 bullish / 1 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 COF is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On FITB it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare COF and FITB 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.