CRWD vs NET Stock Comparison
CRWD currently leads NET in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 36 vs 25. The clearest difference is quality.
What is the main difference between CRWD and NET?
CRWD leads the current stock comparison as CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc. vs Cloudflare, Inc.
CRWD leads
CRWD leads by 11 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience. Wall Street currently favors NET on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support CRWD, and its current signal state is conflicted.
CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc.
Cloudflare, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CRWD over NET, 36 versus 25 as of Oct 21, 2026. CRWD's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience. CRWD also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors NET. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CRWD today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. CRWD lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 11 points over 30 sessions.
Compare CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc. and Cloudflare, Inc. 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 CRWD and NET 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.
- Quality59 vs 30CRWD +29
- Risk Resilience47 vs 32CRWD +15
- Value24 vs 24Even
- Momentum15 vs 15Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor CRWD. CRWD’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience.
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 -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
New signals
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.
CRWD's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CRWD and NET both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CRWD (CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
NET (Cloudflare, Inc.): the counter-case, on 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
CRWDCRWD on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
NETNET on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
CRWDCRWD on Risk Resilience, by 15 points.
Analyst upside
NETNET on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors CRWD, analyst targets favor NET. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | CRWD | NET | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -9.9% | +0.1% | NET has more room |
| Target dispersion | +149.2% | +95.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 33 | 21 | 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 CRWD. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | CRWD | 36 vs 25 |
| Fundamentals | CRWDon balance | revenue growth 6.2% vs 8.8%; EPS growth -81.1% vs -6.4%; TTM ROE 1.3% vs -13.9%; gross margin 75.2% vs 72.6%; operating margin -2.2% vs -14.1% — CRWD takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 24 vs 24 |
| Technicals | CRWD | Price vs 50-day 2.5% vs -3.8%; vs 200-day 40.6% vs 19.9% |
| Risk Resilience | CRWD | Risk Resilience 47 vs 32 |
| Analyst expectations | NET | Target upside -9.9% vs 0.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CRWD and NET 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 11 points.
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (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 CRWD.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20CRWD lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 11 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- CRWD +11
- 36 vs 25
- 7 sessions ago
- CRWD +18
- 43 vs 25
- 30 sessions ago
- CRWD +11
- 54 vs 43
- 90 sessions ago
- CRWD +12
- 53 vs 41
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.
3 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only CRWD
- EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
3 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only NET
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
Both carry 5 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode, Keltner Channel Breakdown, RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce, MACD Bearish Crossover.
CRWD 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 +5.26%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +5.32%, 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.
- 1NET closes the Quality gap — currently 29 points behind, the largest single contributor to CRWD's edge.
- 2NET's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3CRWD's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 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
CRWD leads on balance| Metric | CRWD | NET |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 6.2% | 8.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -81.1% | -6.4% |
| Gross margin | 75.2% | 72.6% |
| Operating margin | -2.2% | -14.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 1.3% | -13.9% |
| Debt to equity | 0.16 | 2.18 |
Performance
CRWD leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | CRWD | NET |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -13% | -16.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -9.1% | -17.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 20.7% | 8.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 102.3% | 40.5% |
| Year to date | 94% | 48% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 88.6% | 38% |
Technicals
CRWD has the stronger structure| Metric | CRWD | NET |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 29.5 | 27.7 |
| ADX (14) | 23.1 | 23 |
| Price vs 50-day | 2.5% | -3.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | 40.6% | 19.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 49.9% | 45.7% |
Risk
CRWD is the more resilient| Metric | CRWD | NET |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.6 | 1.65 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.34 | 0.78 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.27 | 1.08 |
| Max drawdown | -37.2% | -36.8% |
| Current drawdown | -18.5% | -19.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 55.7% | 65.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.1% | -6.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CRWD or NET?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CRWD is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 36 against NET's 25. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. 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 CRWD or NET the better buy right now?
CRWD carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor CRWD over NET?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CRWD leads Quality by 29 points; CRWD leads Risk Resilience by 15 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CRWD or NET?
Analyst price targets imply -9.9% upside for CRWD and +0.1% for NET, so the Street currently favors NET. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors CRWD. 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, CRWD or NET?
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, CRWD or NET?
NET 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, CRWD or NET?
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, CRWD or NET?
CRWD is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CRWD on Risk Resilience, by 15 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 CRWD more profitable than NET?
CRWD leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 75.2% vs 72.6%; operating margin -2.2% vs -14.1%; ttm roe 1.3% vs -13.9%.
Is CRWD's lead over NET getting stronger or weaker?
CRWD lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 11 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 CRWD vs NET verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: NET closes the Quality gap — currently 29 points behind, the largest single contributor to CRWD's edge; NET's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; CRWD's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 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 CRWD and NET?
CRWD: 3 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. NET: 3 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 CRWD is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On NET it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare CRWD and NET 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.