CRWD vs SHOP Stock Comparison
CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc. vs Shopify Inc.
CRWD leads
CRWD leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from SHOP. Wall Street currently favors SHOP on target upside.
Fragile: 1 of 6 evidence groups support CRWD, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc.
Shopify Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CRWD over SHOP, 48 versus 47 as of Sep 2, 2026. CRWD's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum, while SHOP holds the stronger quality profile. CRWD also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors SHOP. 1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CRWD today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. CRWD lead: Reversed — SHOP led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; CRWD now leads by 1.
Compare CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc. and Shopify 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.
- Momentum25%69 vs 53CRWD +16
- Quality30%57 vs 66SHOP +9
- Risk Resilience15%46 vs 43Even
- Value30%24 vs 24Even
1 of 6 evidence groups favor CRWD. CRWD’s edge is concentrated in momentum; SHOP keeps a meaningful quality edge.
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.
CRWD's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CRWD and SHOP both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CRWD (CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum.
SHOP (Shopify Inc.): the counter-case, on quality, fundamentals, 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 at 30% each.
Growth
SHOPSHOP on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
CRWDCRWD on the Momentum factor, by 16 points.
Lower downside
SHOPSHOP carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
SHOPSHOP 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 SHOP. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | CRWD | SHOP | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +1.1% | +14.2% | SHOP has more room |
| Target dispersion | +157% | +46.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 32 | 17 | 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
1 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 | Even | 48 vs 47 |
| Fundamentals | SHOPon balance | revenue growth 6.1% vs 13%; EPS growth -26.7% vs 3.6%; gross margin 75% vs 47.8%; operating margin -3.9% vs 13.9% — SHOP takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 24 vs 24 |
| Technicals | CRWD | Price vs 50-day 2.7% vs 6.4%; vs 200-day 63.9% vs 12.2% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 46 vs 43 |
| Analyst expectations | SHOP | Target upside 1.1% vs 14.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CRWD and SHOP 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 narrow at 1 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 1 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 leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 · Apr 20 – Sep 1CRWD lead: Reversed — SHOP led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; CRWD now leads by 1.
- Today
- CRWD +1
- 48 vs 47
- 7 sessions ago
- SHOP +2
- 47 vs 49
- 30 sessions ago
- SHOP +1
- 54 vs 55
- 90 sessions ago
- SHOP +3
- 47 vs 50
The lead changed hands 13 times in this window, most recently on Aug 31 when CRWD moved ahead of SHOP.
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.
5 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (40.08%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (0.0%)
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.11%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
SHOP 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -5.71%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.09%, 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.
- 1SHOP closes the Momentum gap — currently 16 points behind, the largest single contributor to CRWD's edge.
- 2SHOP generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3CRWD's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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
SHOP leads on balance| Metric | CRWD | SHOP |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 6.1% | 13% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -26.7% | 3.6% |
| Gross margin | 75% | 47.8% |
| Operating margin | -3.9% | 13.9% |
| Return on equity | -0.6% | 15.1% |
| Debt to equity | 0.18 | 0.01 |
Technicals
CRWD has the stronger structure| Metric | CRWD | SHOP |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 54.1 | 44.1 |
| ADX (14) | 25.8 | 29.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | 2.7% | 6.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | 63.9% | 12.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 75.8% | 72.6% |
Risk
Split| Metric | CRWD | SHOP |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.64 | 1.87 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.58 | 0.29 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.71 | 0.43 |
| Max drawdown | -37.2% | -46.7% |
| Current drawdown | 0% | -17.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 53.4% | 57.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.3% | -5.9% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CRWD or SHOP?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CRWD is the stronger of the two as of Sep 2, 2026, scoring 48 against SHOP's 47. The edge comes from momentum. SHOP is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 CRWD or SHOP the better buy right now?
CRWD carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 2, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 1 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor CRWD over SHOP?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. CRWD leads Momentum by 16 points; SHOP leads Quality by 9 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CRWD or SHOP?
Analyst price targets imply +1.1% upside for CRWD and +14.2% for SHOP, so the Street currently favors SHOP. 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 SHOP?
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 SHOP?
SHOP 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 SHOP?
CRWD on the Momentum factor, by 16 points. 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, CRWD or SHOP?
SHOP is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SHOP 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 CRWD more profitable than SHOP?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 75% vs 47.8%; operating margin -3.9% vs 13.9%; roe -0.6% vs 15.1%. Each name leads 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 CRWD's lead over SHOP getting stronger or weaker?
CRWD lead: Reversed — SHOP led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; CRWD now leads by 1. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-20 and 2026-09-01. The lead has changed hands 13 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-31, when CRWD moved ahead of SHOP.
What would change the CRWD vs SHOP verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SHOP closes the Momentum gap — currently 16 points behind, the largest single contributor to CRWD's edge; SHOP generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover; CRWD's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about CRWD and SHOP?
CRWD: 5 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. SHOP: 3 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 CRWD is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On SHOP it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare CRWD and SHOP 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.