CSGP vs DOCN Stock Comparison
CSGP currently leads DOCN in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 59 vs 36. The clearest difference is momentum, while DOCN has the stronger quality profile.
What is the main difference between CSGP and DOCN?
CSGP leads the current stock comparison as CoStar Group, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
CoStar Group, Inc. vs DigitalOcean Holdings, Inc.
CSGP leads
CSGP leads by 23 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, having only recently taken the lead back from DOCN. Wall Street currently favors DOCN on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support CSGP, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
CoStar Group, Inc.
DigitalOcean Holdings, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CSGP over DOCN, 59 versus 36 as of Oct 21, 2026. CSGP's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience, while DOCN holds the stronger quality profile. CSGP also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors DOCN. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CSGP today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. CSGP lead: Reversed — DOCN led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; CSGP now leads by 23.
Compare CoStar Group, Inc. and DigitalOcean Holdings, 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 CSGP and DOCN 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.
- Momentum74 vs 10CSGP +64
- Risk Resilience58 vs 29CSGP +29
- Value46 vs 25CSGP +21
- Quality59 vs 72DOCN +13
4 of 6 evidence groups favor CSGP. CSGP’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience; DOCN keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
CSGP's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CSGP and DOCN both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CSGP (CoStar Group, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.
DOCN (DigitalOcean Holdings, Inc.): the counter-case, on quality, fundamentals, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 75.4% against 44.4%.
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
CSGPCSGP on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
DOCNDOCN on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CSGPCSGP on the peer-relative Value factor, by 21 points.
Momentum
CSGPCSGP on the Momentum factor, by 64 points.
Lower downside
CSGPCSGP on Risk Resilience, by 29 points.
Analyst upside
DOCNDOCN on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors CSGP, analyst targets favor DOCN. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | CSGP | DOCN | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +16% | +69.3% | DOCN has more room |
| Target dispersion | +62.9% | +61.1% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 11 | 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 CSGP. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | CSGP | 59 vs 36 |
| Fundamentals | DOCNon balance | revenue growth 3.1% vs 9%; EPS growth 18.2% vs 100%; gross margin 76.5% vs 57.2%; operating margin 2.2% vs 14.8% — DOCN takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | CSGP | Value 46 vs 25 |
| Technicals | CSGP | Price vs 50-day 8.3% vs -18.3%; vs 200-day -15.6% vs -9.2% |
| Risk Resilience | CSGP | Risk Resilience 58 vs 29 |
| Analyst expectations | DOCN | Target upside 16% vs 69.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CSGP and DOCN 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 23 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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)
- 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 CSGP.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20CSGP lead: Reversed — DOCN led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; CSGP now leads by 23.
- Today
- CSGP +23
- 59 vs 36
- 7 sessions ago
- CSGP +20
- 59 vs 39
- 30 sessions ago
- DOCN +3
- 47 vs 50
- 90 sessions ago
- CSGP +2
- 52 vs 50
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Sep 16 when DOCN moved ahead of CSGP.
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.
2 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only CSGP
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (24.81%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only DOCN
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (13.23%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (9.77%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
CSGP 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 -0.45%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +2.01%, 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.
- 1DOCN closes the Momentum gap — currently 64 points behind, the largest single contributor to CSGP's edge.
- 2DOCN's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3CSGP's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 3 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
DOCN leads on balance| Metric | CSGP | DOCN |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 3.1% | 9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 18.2% | 100% |
| Gross margin | 76.5% | 57.2% |
| Operating margin | 2.2% | 14.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 0.9% | 54.7% |
| Debt to equity | 0.15 | 1.61 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | CSGP | DOCN |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 10.2% | -22.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 14.9% | -31.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 8.2% | -30.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -18.7% | 14.7% |
| Year to date | -50.8% | 106.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -56.6% | 131% |
Technicals
CSGP has the stronger structure| Metric | CSGP | DOCN |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 73.7 | 26.7 |
| ADX (14) | 24.9 | 19.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | 8.3% | -18.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | -15.6% | -9.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 44.4% | 75.4% |
Risk
CSGP is the more resilient| Metric | CSGP | DOCN |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.21 | 2.65 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.61 | 1.38 |
| Sortino ratio | -2.12 | 2.77 |
| Max drawdown | -65.5% | -45.6% |
| Current drawdown | -57.8% | -45.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 45.9% | 87.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.5% | -6.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CSGP or DOCN?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CSGP is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 59 against DOCN's 36. The edge comes from momentum and risk resilience. DOCN 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 CSGP or DOCN the better buy right now?
CSGP 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 lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor CSGP over DOCN?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CSGP leads Momentum by 64 points; CSGP leads Risk Resilience by 29 points; CSGP leads Value by 21 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CSGP or DOCN?
Analyst price targets imply +16% upside for CSGP and +69.3% for DOCN, so the Street currently favors DOCN. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors CSGP. 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, CSGP or DOCN?
CSGP is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CSGP on the peer-relative Value factor, by 21 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, CSGP or DOCN?
DOCN 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, CSGP or DOCN?
CSGP on the Momentum factor, by 64 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, CSGP or DOCN?
CSGP is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CSGP on Risk Resilience, by 29 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 CSGP more profitable than DOCN?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 76.5% vs 57.2%; operating margin 2.2% vs 14.8%; ttm roe 0.9% vs 54.7%. 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 CSGP's lead over DOCN getting stronger or weaker?
CSGP lead: Reversed — DOCN led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; CSGP now leads by 23. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-16, when DOCN moved ahead of CSGP.
What would change the CSGP vs DOCN verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: DOCN closes the Momentum gap — currently 64 points behind, the largest single contributor to CSGP's edge; DOCN's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; CSGP's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 3 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 CSGP and DOCN?
CSGP: 2 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. DOCN: 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 CSGP is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On DOCN it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare CSGP and DOCN 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.