DXC vs FICO Stock Comparison
Compare DXC and FICO across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between DXC and FICO?
DXC leads the current stock comparison as DXC Technology Company, with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
DXC Technology Company vs Fair Isaac Corporation
DXC leads
DXC leads by 12 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from FICO. Wall Street currently favors FICO on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support DXC, and the lead recently changed hands.
DXC Technology Company
Fair Isaac Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors DXC over FICO, 50 versus 38 as of Sep 11, 2026. DXC's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while FICO holds the stronger quality profile. DXC also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors FICO. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor DXC today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. DXC lead: Reversed — FICO led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; DXC now leads by 12.
Compare DXC Technology Company and Fair Isaac Corporation 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 DXC and FICO 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.
- Momentum59 vs 8DXC +51
- Quality20 vs 60FICO +40
- Value75 vs 46DXC +29
- Risk Resilience46 vs 29DXC +17
4 of 6 evidence groups favor DXC. DXC’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; FICO 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 +3
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
DXC's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — DXC and FICO both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
DXC (DXC Technology Company): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
FICO (Fair Isaac Corporation): the counter-case, on quality, fundamentals, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 77.7% against 44%.
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
DXCDXC on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
DXCDXC on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
DXCDXC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 29 points.
Momentum
DXCDXC on the Momentum factor, by 51 points.
Lower downside
DXCDXC on Risk Resilience, by 17 points.
Analyst upside
FICOFICO on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors DXC, analyst targets favor FICO. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | DXC | FICO | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +10.8% | +52.7% | FICO has more room |
| Target dispersion | +43.6% | +53.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 9 | 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 DXC. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | DXC | 50 vs 38 |
| Fundamentals | FICOon balance | revenue growth -4.2% vs -2.5%; EPS growth 193.8% vs -6.5%; TTM ROE 4.1% vs -33.4%; gross margin 13.7% vs 85.1%; operating margin 3.4% vs 51.7% — FICO takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | DXC | Value 75 vs 46 |
| Technicals | DXC | Price vs 50-day 8.4% vs -14.6%; vs 200-day -7.1% vs -25.7% |
| Risk Resilience | DXC | Risk Resilience 46 vs 29 |
| Analyst expectations | FICO | Target upside 10.8% vs 52.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of DXC and FICO 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 12 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)
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 DXC.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10DXC lead: Reversed — FICO led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; DXC now leads by 12.
- Today
- DXC +12
- 50 vs 38
- 7 sessions ago
- DXC +15
- 54 vs 39
- 30 sessions ago
- FICO +4
- 47 vs 51
- 90 sessions ago
- FICO +8
- 52 vs 60
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Sep 2 when DXC moved ahead of FICO.
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 (13.11%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.36%)
1 bullish / 4 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (12.05%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
FICO is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
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 +3.17%, AIQ +1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +2.57%, 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.
- 1FICO closes the Momentum gap — currently 51 points behind, the largest single contributor to DXC's edge.
- 2FICO's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3DXC starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 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
FICO leads on balance| Metric | DXC | FICO |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -4.2% | -2.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 193.8% | -6.5% |
| Gross margin | 13.7% | 85.1% |
| Operating margin | 3.4% | 51.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 4.1% | -33.4% |
| Debt to equity | 1.37 | -1.37 |
Performance
DXC leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | DXC | FICO |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -5.1% | -12.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 3.4% | -8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 25.2% | -21.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -10.2% | -17.6% |
| Year to date | -24.6% | -43.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -24.6% | -37.5% |
Technicals
DXC has the stronger structure| Metric | DXC | FICO |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 55.5 | 27.6 |
| ADX (14) | 30 | 16 |
| Price vs 50-day | 8.4% | -14.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -7.1% | -25.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 44% | 77.7% |
Risk
DXC is the more resilient| Metric | DXC | FICO |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.61 | 0.41 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.26 | -0.61 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.33 | -0.73 |
| Max drawdown | -46.7% | -50.9% |
| Current drawdown | -28.4% | -48.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 56% | 57.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.5% | -6.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, DXC or FICO?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, DXC is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 50 against FICO's 38. The edge comes from momentum and value. FICO 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 DXC or FICO the better buy right now?
DXC carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 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 DXC over FICO?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. DXC leads Momentum by 51 points; FICO leads Quality by 40 points; DXC leads Value by 29 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, DXC or FICO?
Analyst price targets imply +10.8% upside for DXC and +52.7% for FICO, so the Street currently favors FICO. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors DXC. 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, DXC or FICO?
DXC is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. DXC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 29 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, DXC or FICO?
DXC 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, DXC or FICO?
DXC on the Momentum factor, by 51 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, DXC or FICO?
DXC is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. DXC on Risk Resilience, by 17 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 DXC more profitable than FICO?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 13.7% vs 85.1%; operating margin 3.4% vs 51.7%; ttm roe 4.1% vs -33.4%. DXC leads on one measure and FICO 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 DXC's lead over FICO getting stronger or weaker?
DXC lead: Reversed — FICO led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; DXC now leads by 12. 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 2026-09-02, when DXC moved ahead of FICO.
What would change the DXC vs FICO verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: FICO closes the Momentum gap — currently 51 points behind, the largest single contributor to DXC's edge; FICO's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; DXC starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; 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 DXC and FICO?
DXC: 0 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral. FICO: 1 bullish / 4 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 DXC is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On FICO it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare DXC and FICO 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.