CRWV vs IREN Stock Comparison
CoreWeave, Inc. Class A Common Stock vs IREN Limited
IREN leads
IREN leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, having only recently taken the lead back from CRWV.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support IREN, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
CoreWeave, Inc. Class A Common Stock
IREN Limited
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors IREN over CRWV, 38 versus 35 as of Sep 5, 2026. IREN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience, while CRWV holds the stronger value profile. IREN also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor IREN today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. IREN lead: Reversed — CRWV led by 9 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; IREN now leads by 3.
Compare CoreWeave, Inc. Class A Common Stock and IREN Limited across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare CRWV and IREN 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.
- Momentum25%36 vs 56IREN +20
- Risk Resilience15%10 vs 30IREN +20
- Value30%53 vs 34CRWV +19
- Quality30%30 vs 32Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor IREN. IREN’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience; CRWV keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-04, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-03.
Largest factor move: Momentum +15
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +5
New signals
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
IREN's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CRWV and IREN both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
IREN (IREN Limited): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.
CRWV (CoreWeave, Inc. Class A Common Stock): the counter-case, on value, fundamentals, valuation.
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
IRENIREN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
CRWVCRWV on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CRWVCRWV on the peer-relative Value factor, by 19 points.
Momentum
IRENIREN on the Momentum factor, by 20 points.
Lower downside
IRENIREN on Risk Resilience, by 20 points.
Analyst upside
IRENIREN on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | CRWV | IREN | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +51.4% | +77.6% | IREN has more room |
| Target dispersion | +92.4% | +70.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 18 | 8 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor IREN. 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 | 35 vs 38 |
| Fundamentals | CRWVon balance | revenue growth 23.9% vs -5.2%; EPS growth 18.6% vs -38.5%; TTM ROE -45.4% vs -23%; gross margin 67.4% vs 68.9%; operating margin -3% vs -148.1% — CRWV takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | CRWV | Value 53 vs 34 |
| Technicals | IREN | Price vs 50-day 4.4% vs 11.1%; vs 200-day -2.3% vs -2.1% |
| Risk Resilience | IREN | Risk Resilience 10 vs 30 |
| Analyst expectations | IREN | Target upside 51.4% vs 77.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CRWV and IREN 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 3 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 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 IREN.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 23 – Sep 4IREN lead: Reversed — CRWV led by 9 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; IREN now leads by 3.
- Today
- IREN +3
- 35 vs 38
- 7 sessions ago
- Level
- 34 vs 34
- 30 sessions ago
- CRWV +9
- 48 vs 39
- 90 sessions ago
- CRWV +2
- 33 vs 31
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Aug 3 when CRWV moved ahead of IREN.
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 / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (6.84%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (6.85%)
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (13.52%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (7.76%)
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
IREN 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 up over the latest session (price +5.68%, AIQ +3 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +7.27%, AIQ +1 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.
- 1CRWV closes the Momentum gap — currently 20 points behind, the largest single contributor to IREN's edge.
- 2CRWV's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3IREN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 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
CRWV leads on balance| Metric | CRWV | IREN |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 23.9% | -5.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 18.6% | -38.5% |
| Gross margin | 67.4% | 68.9% |
| Operating margin | -3% | -148.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -45.4% | -23% |
| Debt to equity | 10.27 | 1.87 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | CRWV | IREN |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 6.1% | 26% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -1.4% | 8.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -11% | -17.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 22.4% | 21.7% |
| Year to date | 24.8% | 18.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -2% | 58.4% |
Technicals
IREN has the stronger structure| Metric | CRWV | IREN |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 28.3 | 49.6 |
| ADX (14) | 11 | 13.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | 4.4% | 11.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -2.3% | -2.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 91.5% | 90.5% |
Risk
IREN is the more resilient| Metric | CRWV | IREN |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 3.37 | 3.84 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.45 | 0.99 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.85 | 1.95 |
| Max drawdown | -57.5% | -61.6% |
| Current drawdown | -37.5% | -41.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 96.2% | 111.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -8.1% | -9.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CRWV or IREN?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, IREN is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 38 against CRWV's 35. The edge comes from momentum and risk resilience. CRWV is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 CRWV or IREN the better buy right now?
IREN carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor IREN over CRWV?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. IREN leads Momentum by 20 points; IREN leads Risk Resilience by 20 points; CRWV leads Value by 19 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CRWV or IREN?
Analyst price targets imply +51.4% upside for CRWV and +77.6% for IREN, so the Street currently favors IREN. 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, CRWV or IREN?
CRWV is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CRWV on the peer-relative Value factor, by 19 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, CRWV or IREN?
CRWV 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, CRWV or IREN?
IREN on the Momentum factor, by 20 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, CRWV or IREN?
IREN is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. IREN on Risk Resilience, by 20 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is CRWV more profitable than IREN?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 67.4% vs 68.9%; operating margin -3% vs -148.1%; ttm roe -45.4% vs -23%. CRWV leads on one measure and IREN on two measures, 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 IREN's lead over CRWV getting stronger or weaker?
IREN lead: Reversed — CRWV led by 9 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; IREN now leads by 3. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-23 and 2026-09-04. The lead has changed hands 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-03, when CRWV moved ahead of IREN.
What would change the CRWV vs IREN verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CRWV closes the Momentum gap — currently 20 points behind, the largest single contributor to IREN's edge; CRWV's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; IREN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; 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 CRWV and IREN?
CRWV: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. IREN: 1 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 CRWV is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On IREN it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare CRWV and IREN 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.