CRUS vs STNE Stock Comparison
CRUS currently leads STNE in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 65 vs 52. The clearest difference is risk resilience.
What is the main difference between CRUS and STNE?
CRUS leads the current stock comparison as Cirrus Logic, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Cirrus Logic, Inc. vs StoneCo Ltd.
CRUS leads
CRUS leads by 13 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from STNE. Wall Street currently favors STNE on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support CRUS, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Cirrus Logic, Inc.
StoneCo Ltd.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CRUS over STNE, 65 versus 52 as of Oct 31, 2026. CRUS's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and momentum. CRUS also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors STNE. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CRUS today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. CRUS lead: Reversed — STNE led by 6 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; CRUS now leads by 13.
Compare Cirrus Logic, Inc. and StoneCo Ltd. 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 CRUS and STNE 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.
- Risk Resilience70 vs 32CRUS +38
- Momentum44 vs 23CRUS +21
- Quality73 vs 63CRUS +10
- Value72 vs 75Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor CRUS. CRUS’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and momentum.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum -4
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 8 active signals are unchanged.
CRUS's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CRUS and STNE both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CRUS (Cirrus Logic, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and momentum.
STNE (StoneCo Ltd.): the counter-case, on fundamentals, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 91.3% against 31.6%.
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
CRUSCRUS on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CRUSCRUS on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
CRUSCRUS on the Momentum factor, by 21 points.
Lower downside
CRUSCRUS on Risk Resilience, by 38 points.
Analyst upside
STNESTNE on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors CRUS, analyst targets favor STNE. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | CRUS | STNE | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +59.7% | +79.4% | STNE has more room |
| Target dispersion | +39.9% | +17.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 3 | 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
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CRUS. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | CRUS | 65 vs 52 |
| Fundamentals | STNEon balance | revenue growth 2.5% vs -6.7%; EPS growth -5.6% vs -73.7%; TTM ROE 20.4% vs 29.7%; gross margin 52.8% vs 72.4%; operating margin 23% vs 50% — STNE takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 72 vs 75 |
| Technicals | CRUS | Price vs 50-day -4% vs -23.9%; vs 200-day -18.6% vs -33.5% |
| Risk Resilience | CRUS | Risk Resilience 70 vs 32 |
| Analyst expectations | STNE | Target upside 59.7% vs 79.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CRUS and STNE 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 13 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (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 CRUS.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28CRUS lead: Reversed — STNE led by 6 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; CRUS now leads by 13.
- Today
- CRUS +13
- 65 vs 52
- 7 sessions ago
- Level
- 60 vs 60
- 30 sessions ago
- STNE +6
- 59 vs 65
- 90 sessions ago
- CRUS +4
- 60 vs 56
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Oct 7 when STNE moved ahead of CRUS.
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 / 2 bearish, conflicted
Only CRUS
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 4 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only STNE
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (7.30%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, Downtrend Structure Active.
CRUS 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.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -3.42%, AIQ -1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -3.12%, 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.
- 1STNE closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 38 points behind, the largest single contributor to CRUS's edge.
- 2STNE's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3CRUS's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 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
STNE leads on balance| Metric | CRUS | STNE |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 2.5% | -6.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -5.6% | -73.7% |
| Gross margin | 52.8% | 72.4% |
| Operating margin | 23% | 50% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 20.4% | 29.7% |
| Debt to equity | 0.08 | 1.81 |
Performance
CRUS leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | CRUS | STNE |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.2% | -27.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -5.7% | -13.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -14.2% | -29.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -28.1% | -25.4% |
| Year to date | -4.6% | -38.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -13.4% | -57.1% |
Technicals
CRUS has the stronger structure| Metric | CRUS | STNE |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 49.7 | 26.5 |
| ADX (14) | 17.7 | 30 |
| Price vs 50-day | -4% | -23.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | -18.6% | -33.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 31.6% | 91.3% |
Risk
CRUS is the more resilient| Metric | CRUS | STNE |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.96 | 1.46 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.43 | -1.13 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.61 | -1.28 |
| Max drawdown | -40.6% | -58% |
| Current drawdown | -36.8% | -58% |
| Annualized volatility | 35.8% | 62.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.8% | -5.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CRUS or STNE?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CRUS is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 65 against STNE's 52. The edge comes from risk resilience and momentum. 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 CRUS or STNE the better buy right now?
CRUS carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor CRUS over STNE?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CRUS leads Risk Resilience by 38 points; CRUS leads Momentum by 21 points; CRUS leads Quality by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CRUS or STNE?
Analyst price targets imply +59.7% upside for CRUS and +79.4% for STNE, so the Street currently favors STNE. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors CRUS. 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, CRUS or STNE?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. 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, CRUS or STNE?
CRUS 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, CRUS or STNE?
CRUS on the Momentum factor, by 21 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, CRUS or STNE?
CRUS is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CRUS on Risk Resilience, by 38 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 CRUS more profitable than STNE?
STNE leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 52.8% vs 72.4%; operating margin 23% vs 50%; ttm roe 20.4% vs 29.7%.
Is CRUS's lead over STNE getting stronger or weaker?
CRUS lead: Reversed — STNE led by 6 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; CRUS now leads by 13. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-07, when STNE moved ahead of CRUS.
What would change the CRUS vs STNE verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: STNE closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 38 points behind, the largest single contributor to CRUS's edge; STNE's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; CRUS's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; 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 CRUS and STNE?
CRUS: 1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. STNE: 2 bullish / 4 bearish / 2 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 CRUS is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On STNE it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare CRUS and STNE 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.