DSP vs GENI Stock Comparison
DSP currently leads GENI in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 64 vs 36. The clearest difference is risk resilience.
What is the main difference between DSP and GENI?
DSP leads the current stock comparison as Viant Technology Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Viant Technology Inc. vs Genius Sports Limited
DSP leads
DSP leads by 28 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Quality. Wall Street currently favors GENI on target upside.
Stable: 5 of 6 evidence groups support DSP, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Viant Technology Inc.
Genius Sports Limited
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors DSP over GENI, 64 versus 36 as of Oct 31, 2026. DSP's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and quality. DSP also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors GENI. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor DSP today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. DSP lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 28 points over 30 sessions. DSP leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so a sweep is not explained by valuation alone — it deserves additional scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, expectations or event risk.
Compare Viant Technology Inc. and Genius Sports Limited 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 DSP and GENI 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.
- Risk Resilience61 vs 22DSP +39
- Quality59 vs 24DSP +35
- Momentum79 vs 44DSP +35
- Value59 vs 48DSP +11
5 of 6 evidence groups favor DSP. DSP’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and quality.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
No factor moved materially.
New signals
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (2.0%)
Largest factor move: Momentum -4
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
DSP's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — DSP and GENI both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
DSP (Viant Technology Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and quality.
GENI (Genius Sports Limited): the counter-case, on analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 55.9% against 43.3%.
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
DSPDSP on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
DSPDSP on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
DSPDSP on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 points.
Momentum
DSPDSP on the Momentum factor, by 35 points.
Lower downside
DSPDSP on Risk Resilience, by 39 points.
Analyst upside
GENIGENI on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors DSP, analyst targets favor GENI. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | DSP | GENI | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +42.2% | +61.5% | GENI has more room |
| Target dispersion | +19.2% | +38.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 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
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor DSP. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | DSP | 64 vs 36 |
| Fundamentals | DSP | revenue growth 17.8% vs 4%; EPS growth 95.3% vs -33.3%; TTM ROE 11.4% vs -25.7%; gross margin 44.5% vs 27.4%; operating margin 2.3% vs -12.6% |
| Valuation | DSP | Value 59 vs 48 |
| Technicals | DSP | Price vs 50-day 0.5% vs -5.4%; vs 200-day 21.7% vs 1.2% |
| Risk Resilience | DSP | Risk Resilience 61 vs 22 |
| Analyst expectations | GENI | Target upside 42.2% vs 61.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of DSP and GENI 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 28 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (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 DSP.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28DSP lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 28 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- DSP +28
- 64 vs 36
- 7 sessions ago
- DSP +27
- 64 vs 37
- 30 sessions ago
- DSP +28
- 63 vs 35
- 90 sessions ago
- DSP +22
- 60 vs 38
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.
5 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only DSP
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (2.0%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral
No signal that the other name lacks.
Both carry 4 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, Golden Cross Active, ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode, MACD Bullish Crossover.
DSP 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 -3.82%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -1.55%, 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.
- 1GENI closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 39 points behind, the largest single contributor to DSP's edge.
- 2GENI's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3DSP's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 5 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
DSP leads on balance| Metric | DSP | GENI |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 17.8% | 4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 95.3% | -33.3% |
| Gross margin | 44.5% | 27.4% |
| Operating margin | 2.3% | -12.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 11.4% | -25.7% |
| Debt to equity | 0.2 | 1.2 |
Performance
DSP leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | DSP | GENI |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 5.6% | -1.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 16.2% | 10.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 25.2% | -9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 34.8% | 49.4% |
| Year to date | 16.2% | -42.4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 56.3% | -47.2% |
Technicals
DSP has the stronger structure| Metric | DSP | GENI |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 70.1 | 44.5 |
| ADX (14) | 14.8 | 13.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 0.5% | -5.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | 21.7% | 1.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 43.3% | 55.9% |
Risk
DSP is the more resilient| Metric | DSP | GENI |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.15 | 1.64 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.96 | -0.53 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.44 | -0.8 |
| Max drawdown | -31% | -66.8% |
| Current drawdown | 0% | -46.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 67.4% | 73.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.6% | -6.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, DSP or GENI?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, DSP is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 64 against GENI's 36. The edge comes from risk resilience and quality. 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 DSP or GENI the better buy right now?
DSP carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 5 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 DSP over GENI?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. DSP leads Risk Resilience by 39 points; DSP leads Quality by 35 points; DSP leads Momentum by 35 points. DSP leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so the sweep is not explained by GENI simply being cheaper — it warrants extra scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, forward expectations or event risk the factors do not capture.
Which has more analyst upside, DSP or GENI?
Analyst price targets imply +42.2% upside for DSP and +61.5% for GENI, so the Street currently favors GENI. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors DSP. 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, DSP or GENI?
DSP is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. DSP on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 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, DSP or GENI?
DSP 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, DSP or GENI?
DSP on the Momentum factor, by 35 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, DSP or GENI?
DSP is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. DSP on Risk Resilience, by 39 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 DSP more profitable than GENI?
DSP leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 44.5% vs 27.4%; operating margin 2.3% vs -12.6%; ttm roe 11.4% vs -25.7%.
Is DSP's lead over GENI getting stronger or weaker?
DSP lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 28 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the DSP vs GENI verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: GENI closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 39 points behind, the largest single contributor to DSP's edge; GENI's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; DSP's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 5 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 DSP and GENI?
DSP: 5 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. GENI: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral. 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 DSP is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On GENI it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare DSP and GENI 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.