CRM vs MSTR Stock Comparison
Salesforce, Inc. vs Strategy Inc
CRM leads
CRM leads by 10 AIQ points, primarily on Value, but the lead has narrowed from 19 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors MSTR on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support CRM, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Salesforce, Inc.
Strategy Inc
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CRM over MSTR, 64 versus 54 as of Sep 2, 2026. CRM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value. CRM also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors MSTR. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CRM today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. CRM lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 19 to 10 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Salesforce, Inc. and Strategy Inc across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
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.
- Value30%69 vs 34CRM +35
- Momentum25%81 vs 84Even
- Risk Resilience15%39 vs 37Even
- Quality30%57 vs 58Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor CRM. CRM’s edge is concentrated in value.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-01, compared against the prior scored session 2026-08-31.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
CRM's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CRM and MSTR both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CRM (Salesforce, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value.
MSTR (Strategy Inc): the counter-case, on analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 84.2% against 66.4%.
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
CRMCRM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
MSTRMSTR on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CRMCRM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 35 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
CRMCRM carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
MSTRMSTR on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors CRM, analyst targets favor MSTR. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | CRM | MSTR | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +2.6% | +74.3% | MSTR has more room |
| Target dispersion | +47.7% | +105.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 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 CRM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | CRM | 64 vs 54 |
| Fundamentals | CRMon balance | revenue growth -0.6% vs -1.6%; EPS growth 16.8% vs 37.1%; ROE 14.9% vs -60.8%; gross margin 77.6% vs 67.6%; operating margin 21.9% vs -16.8% — CRM takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | CRM | Value 69 vs 34 |
| Technicals | CRM | Price vs 50-day 39.5% vs 21.8%; vs 200-day 27.6% vs -5.8% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 39 vs 37 |
| Analyst expectations | MSTR | Target upside 2.6% vs 74.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CRM and MSTR 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 10 points.
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (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 CRM.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 20 – Sep 1CRM lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 19 to 10 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- CRM +10
- 64 vs 54
- 7 sessions ago
- CRM +9
- 64 vs 55
- 30 sessions ago
- CRM +19
- 63 vs 44
- 90 sessions ago
- CRM +11
- 48 vs 37
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Apr 23 when MSTR moved ahead of CRM.
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.
3 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (9.50%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (39.65%)
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
CRM 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 -1.09%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.83%, AIQ 0 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.
- 1MSTR closes the Value gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to CRM's edge.
- 2MSTR's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3CRM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 3 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 9 points over 30 sessions, and a further 10-point move would eliminate CRM'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
CRM leads on balance| Metric | CRM | MSTR |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -0.6% | -1.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 16.8% | 37.1% |
| Gross margin | 77.6% | 67.6% |
| Operating margin | 21.9% | -16.8% |
| Return on equity | 14.9% | -60.8% |
| Debt to equity | 1.22 | 0.15 |
Technicals
CRM has the stronger structure| Metric | CRM | MSTR |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 80.8 | 71.6 |
| ADX (14) | 30.6 | 30.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 39.5% | 21.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | 27.6% | -5.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 66.4% | 84.2% |
Risk
Split| Metric | CRM | MSTR |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.45 | 2.88 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.17 | -0.88 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.3 | -1.64 |
| Max drawdown | -43.6% | -77.1% |
| Current drawdown | -3.3% | -63% |
| Annualized volatility | 47.4% | 77.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.1% | -7.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CRM or MSTR?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CRM is the stronger of the two as of Sep 2, 2026, scoring 64 against MSTR's 54. The edge comes from value. 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 CRM or MSTR the better buy right now?
CRM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 2, 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 CRM over MSTR?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. CRM leads Value by 35 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CRM or MSTR?
Analyst price targets imply +2.6% upside for CRM and +74.3% for MSTR, so the Street currently favors MSTR. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors CRM. 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, CRM or MSTR?
CRM is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CRM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 35 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, CRM or MSTR?
MSTR 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, CRM or MSTR?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, CRM or MSTR?
CRM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CRM carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is CRM more profitable than MSTR?
CRM leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 77.6% vs 67.6%; operating margin 21.9% vs -16.8%; roe 14.9% vs -60.8%.
Is CRM's lead over MSTR getting stronger or weaker?
CRM lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 19 to 10 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-20 and 2026-09-01. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-04-23, when MSTR moved ahead of CRM.
What would change the CRM vs MSTR verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: MSTR closes the Value gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to CRM's edge; MSTR's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; CRM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 3 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 9 points over 30 sessions, and a further 10-point move would eliminate CRM's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about CRM and MSTR?
CRM: 3 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. MSTR: 2 bullish / 2 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 CRM is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On MSTR it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare CRM and MSTR 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.