CSGP vs DOCU Stock Comparison
Compare CSGP and DOCU across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between CSGP and DOCU?
DOCU leads the current stock comparison as DocuSign, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
CoStar Group, Inc. vs DocuSign, Inc.
DOCU leads
DOCU leads by 17 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, and the lead has widened from 14 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors CSGP on target upside.
Stable: 4 of 6 evidence groups support DOCU, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
CoStar Group, Inc.
DocuSign, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors DOCU over CSGP, 69 versus 52 as of Sep 6, 2026. DOCU's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while CSGP holds the stronger risk resilience profile. DOCU also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors CSGP. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor DOCU today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. DOCU lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 17 points over 30 sessions.
Compare CoStar Group, Inc. and DocuSign, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price-return comparison using available daily close history.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000
Based on available close-price history. Distribution reinvestment is not added unless already reflected in the source series.
Compare CSGP and DOCU 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%52 vs 79DOCU +27
- Value30%46 vs 68DOCU +22
- Quality30%59 vs 75DOCU +16
- Risk Resilience15%52 vs 45CSGP +7
4 of 6 evidence groups favor DOCU. DOCU’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; CSGP keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-05, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-04.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
DOCU's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CSGP and DOCU both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
DOCU (DocuSign, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
CSGP (CoStar Group, Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, 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
DOCUDOCU on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
CSGPCSGP on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
DOCUDOCU on the peer-relative Value factor, by 22 points.
Momentum
DOCUDOCU on the Momentum factor, by 27 points.
Lower downside
CSGPCSGP on Risk Resilience, by 7 points.
Analyst upside
CSGPCSGP on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors DOCU, analyst targets favor CSGP. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | CSGP | DOCU | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +29.6% | -2.8% | CSGP has more room |
| Target dispersion | +72.4% | +30.1% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 8 | 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 DOCU. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | DOCU | 52 vs 69 |
| Fundamentals | DOCUon balance | EPS growth 18.2% vs -11.1%; gross margin 76.5% vs 79.4%; operating margin 2.2% vs 10.6% — DOCU takes 2 of 3 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | DOCU | Value 46 vs 68 |
| Technicals | DOCU | Price vs 50-day 2% vs 22.8%; vs 200-day -29.3% vs 23.4% |
| Risk Resilience | CSGP | Risk Resilience 52 vs 45 |
| Analyst expectations | CSGP | Target upside 29.6% vs -2.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CSGP and DOCU and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 17 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 DOCU.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 24 – Sep 5DOCU lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 17 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- DOCU +17
- 52 vs 69
- 7 sessions ago
- DOCU +16
- 52 vs 68
- 30 sessions ago
- DOCU +14
- 55 vs 69
- 90 sessions ago
- DOCU +15
- 46 vs 61
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.
0 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (44.34%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.46%)
5 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (3.82%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
DOCU 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 -2.43%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +3.7%, 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.
- 1CSGP closes the Momentum gap — currently 27 points behind, the largest single contributor to DOCU's edge.
- 2CSGP's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3DOCU's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 5 bullish and 2 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
DOCU leads on balance| Metric | CSGP | DOCU |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 3.1% | -0.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 18.2% | -11.1% |
| Gross margin | 76.5% | 79.4% |
| Operating margin | 2.2% | 10.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 0.9% | 16.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.15 | 0.1 |
Performance
DOCU leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | CSGP | DOCU |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -4.1% | 6.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 2.2% | 13.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -8.8% | 33.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -36.1% | 40.5% |
| Year to date | -54% | 0% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -64.8% | -9.9% |
Technicals
DOCU has the stronger structure| Metric | CSGP | DOCU |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 47.5 | 72.8 |
| ADX (14) | 15.1 | 32.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | 2% | 22.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | -29.3% | 23.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 53.4% | 56.9% |
Risk
CSGP is the more resilient| Metric | CSGP | DOCU |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.25 | 0.62 |
| Sharpe ratio | -2.28 | -0.05 |
| Sortino ratio | -2.91 | -0.08 |
| Max drawdown | -69.7% | -50.9% |
| Current drawdown | -65.5% | -19.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 44% | 49.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.5% | -5.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CSGP or DOCU?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, DOCU is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 69 against CSGP's 52. The edge comes from momentum and value. CSGP is not without a case — it holds the better risk resilience 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 DOCU the better buy right now?
DOCU carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 6, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Stable rating means the gap is wide and the evidence is broad, so the conclusion is unlikely to turn on a single session.
Why does the AIQ Score favor DOCU over CSGP?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. DOCU leads Momentum by 27 points; DOCU leads Value by 22 points; DOCU leads Quality by 16 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CSGP or DOCU?
Analyst price targets imply +29.6% upside for CSGP and -2.8% for DOCU, so the Street currently favors CSGP. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors DOCU. 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 DOCU?
DOCU is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. DOCU on the peer-relative Value factor, by 22 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 DOCU?
CSGP 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 DOCU?
DOCU on the Momentum factor, by 27 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, CSGP or DOCU?
CSGP is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CSGP on Risk Resilience, by 7 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 CSGP more profitable than DOCU?
DOCU leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 76.5% vs 79.4%; operating margin 2.2% vs 10.6%; ttm roe 0.9% vs 16.4%.
Is DOCU's lead over CSGP getting stronger or weaker?
DOCU lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 17 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-24 and 2026-09-05. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the CSGP vs DOCU verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CSGP closes the Momentum gap — currently 27 points behind, the largest single contributor to DOCU's edge; CSGP's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; DOCU's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 5 bullish and 2 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 CSGP and DOCU?
CSGP: 0 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral. DOCU: 5 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 DOCU it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare CSGP and DOCU 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.