DOCU vs ESTC Stock Comparison
Compare DOCU and ESTC across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between DOCU and ESTC?
DOCU leads the current stock comparison as DocuSign, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
DocuSign, Inc. vs Elastic N.V.
DOCU leads
DOCU leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from ESTC.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support DOCU, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
DocuSign, Inc.
Elastic N.V.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors DOCU over ESTC, 67 versus 65 as of Sep 11, 2026. DOCU's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum, while ESTC holds the stronger quality profile. DOCU also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor DOCU today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. DOCU lead: Reversed — ESTC led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; DOCU now leads by 2.
Compare DocuSign, Inc. and Elastic N.V. 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 DOCU and ESTC 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.
- Quality75 vs 95ESTC +20
- Value68 vs 49DOCU +19
- Momentum68 vs 56DOCU +12
- Risk Resilience45 vs 54ESTC +9
3 of 6 evidence groups favor DOCU. DOCU’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum; ESTC keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Momentum +2
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -2
No new signals fired.
DOCU's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — DOCU and ESTC both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
DOCU (DocuSign, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and momentum.
ESTC (Elastic N.V.): the counter-case, on quality, risk resilience, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 95.3% against 59.6%.
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 most heavily.
Growth
DOCUDOCU on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
DOCUDOCU on the peer-relative Value factor, by 19 points.
Momentum
DOCUDOCU on the Momentum factor, by 12 points.
Lower downside
ESTCESTC on Risk Resilience, by 9 points.
Analyst upside
DOCUDOCU 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 | DOCU | ESTC | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +1.3% | -3.1% | DOCU has more room |
| Target dispersion | +30.1% | +87.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 10 | 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 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 | Even | 67 vs 65 |
| Fundamentals | DOCUon balance | EPS growth -11.1% vs -103.8%; TTM ROE 16.4% vs 35.3%; gross margin 79.4% vs 75.5%; operating margin 10.6% vs -1.5% — DOCU takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | DOCU | Value 68 vs 49 |
| Technicals | ESTC | Price vs 50-day 15.4% vs 13.3%; vs 200-day 22.7% vs 30.8% |
| Risk Resilience | ESTC | Risk Resilience 45 vs 54 |
| Analyst expectations | DOCU | Target upside 1.3% vs -3.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of DOCU and ESTC 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 2 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 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
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10DOCU lead: Reversed — ESTC led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; DOCU now leads by 2.
- Today
- DOCU +2
- 67 vs 65
- 7 sessions ago
- Level
- 69 vs 69
- 30 sessions ago
- ESTC +3
- 69 vs 72
- 90 sessions ago
- DOCU +4
- 67 vs 63
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Jul 30 when ESTC moved ahead of DOCU.
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 / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.08%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (15.29%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long 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.
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.23%, AIQ +1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -0.11%, 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.
- 1ESTC closes the Value gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to DOCU's edge.
- 2ESTC generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3DOCU's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 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
DOCU leads on balance| Metric | DOCU | ESTC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -0.8% | 6.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -11.1% | -103.8% |
| Gross margin | 79.4% | 75.5% |
| Operating margin | 10.6% | -1.5% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 16.4% | 35.3% |
| Debt to equity | 0.1 | 0.02 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | DOCU | ESTC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.6% | -6.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 13.3% | 8.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 42.6% | 37.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 37.1% | 58% |
| Year to date | -3.8% | 10.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -19.5% | -9.6% |
Technicals
ESTC has the stronger structure| Metric | DOCU | ESTC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 58.1 | 47.9 |
| ADX (14) | 36.2 | 38 |
| Price vs 50-day | 15.4% | 13.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | 22.7% | 30.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 59.6% | 95.3% |
Risk
ESTC is the more resilient| Metric | DOCU | ESTC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.64 | 0.94 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.23 | 0.06 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.32 | 0.09 |
| Max drawdown | -50.9% | -54.2% |
| Current drawdown | -22.6% | -16.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 49.1% | 57.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.1% | -5.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, DOCU or ESTC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, DOCU is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 67 against ESTC's 65. The edge comes from value and momentum. ESTC 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 DOCU or ESTC the better buy right now?
DOCU carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 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 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor DOCU over ESTC?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. ESTC leads Quality by 20 points; DOCU leads Value by 19 points; DOCU leads Momentum by 12 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, DOCU or ESTC?
Analyst price targets imply +1.3% upside for DOCU and -3.1% for ESTC, so the Street currently favors DOCU. 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, DOCU or ESTC?
DOCU is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. DOCU 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, DOCU or ESTC?
DOCU 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, DOCU or ESTC?
DOCU on the Momentum factor, by 12 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, DOCU or ESTC?
ESTC is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ESTC on Risk Resilience, by 9 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 DOCU more profitable than ESTC?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 79.4% vs 75.5%; operating margin 10.6% vs -1.5%; ttm roe 16.4% vs 35.3%. DOCU leads on two measures and ESTC 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 DOCU's lead over ESTC getting stronger or weaker?
DOCU lead: Reversed — ESTC led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; DOCU now leads by 2. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-30, when ESTC moved ahead of DOCU.
What would change the DOCU vs ESTC verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ESTC closes the Value gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to DOCU's edge; ESTC generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover; DOCU's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 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 DOCU and ESTC?
DOCU: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. ESTC: 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 DOCU is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On ESTC it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare DOCU and ESTC 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.