EBAY vs MGNI Stock Comparison
Compare EBAY and MGNI across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between EBAY and MGNI?
EBAY leads the current stock comparison as eBay Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
eBay Inc. vs Magnite, Inc.
EBAY leads
EBAY leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from MGNI.
Fragile: 5 of 6 evidence groups support EBAY, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
eBay Inc.
Magnite, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors EBAY over MGNI, 55 versus 51 as of Sep 11, 2026. EBAY's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and value, while MGNI holds the stronger momentum profile. EBAY also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor EBAY today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. EBAY lead: Reversed — MGNI led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; EBAY now leads by 4.
Compare eBay Inc. and Magnite, 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 EBAY and MGNI 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 Resilience48 vs 33EBAY +15
- Momentum50 vs 63MGNI +13
- Value40 vs 29EBAY +11
- Quality77 vs 71EBAY +6
5 of 6 evidence groups favor EBAY. EBAY’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and value; MGNI keeps a meaningful momentum 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 -1
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +4
No new signals fired.
EBAY's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — EBAY and MGNI both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
EBAY (eBay Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and value.
MGNI (Magnite, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 40% against 28.6%.
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
EBAYEBAY on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
MGNIMGNI on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EBAYEBAY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 points.
Momentum
MGNIMGNI on the Momentum factor, by 13 points.
Lower downside
EBAYEBAY on Risk Resilience, by 15 points.
Analyst upside
EBAYEBAY 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 | EBAY | MGNI | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +8.5% | +3.6% | EBAY has more room |
| Target dispersion | +45.3% | +40.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 19 | 5 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor EBAY. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | EBAY | 55 vs 51 |
| Fundamentals | EBAYon balance | revenue growth 1.5% vs 17.3%; EPS growth 8.8% vs 3.7%; TTM ROE 48.3% vs 18.6%; gross margin 72.5% vs 64.8%; operating margin 20.5% vs 15.6% — EBAY takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | EBAY | Value 40 vs 29 |
| Technicals | MGNI | Price vs 50-day -1.1% vs 8.6%; vs 200-day 6.1% vs 46.2% |
| Risk Resilience | EBAY | Risk Resilience 48 vs 33 |
| Analyst expectations | EBAY | Target upside 8.5% vs 3.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of EBAY and MGNI 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 4 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
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 EBAY.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10EBAY lead: Reversed — MGNI led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; EBAY now leads by 4.
- Today
- EBAY +4
- 55 vs 51
- 7 sessions ago
- EBAY +6
- 56 vs 50
- 30 sessions ago
- MGNI +4
- 50 vs 54
- 90 sessions ago
- EBAY +8
- 62 vs 54
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Aug 26 when EBAY moved ahead of MGNI.
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 / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (10.07%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (35.88%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
MGNI 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +2.59%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.93%, 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.
- 1MGNI closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 15 points behind, the largest single contributor to EBAY's edge.
- 2MGNI's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3EBAY's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 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
EBAY leads on balance| Metric | EBAY | MGNI |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 1.5% | 17.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 8.8% | 3.7% |
| Gross margin | 72.5% | 64.8% |
| Operating margin | 20.5% | 15.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 48.3% | 18.6% |
| Debt to equity | 1.53 | 0.45 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | EBAY | MGNI |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.6% | -5.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 2.7% | -3.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -1.3% | 50.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 14.6% | 80.7% |
| Year to date | 20.6% | 45.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 12.9% | -7.1% |
Technicals
MGNI has the stronger structure| Metric | EBAY | MGNI |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 50.9 | 51.8 |
| ADX (14) | 14.6 | 32.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1.1% | 8.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 6.1% | 46.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 28.6% | 40% |
Risk
EBAY is the more resilient| Metric | EBAY | MGNI |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.73 | 1.05 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.43 | 0.16 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.51 | 0.24 |
| Max drawdown | -20.3% | -56.8% |
| Current drawdown | -11.7% | -9.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 35.8% | 58.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.4% | -5.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, EBAY or MGNI?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, EBAY is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 55 against MGNI's 51. The edge comes from risk resilience and value. MGNI is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 EBAY or MGNI the better buy right now?
EBAY carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 5 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor EBAY over MGNI?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. EBAY leads Risk Resilience by 15 points; MGNI leads Momentum by 13 points; EBAY leads Value by 11 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, EBAY or MGNI?
Analyst price targets imply +8.5% upside for EBAY and +3.6% for MGNI, so the Street currently favors EBAY. 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, EBAY or MGNI?
EBAY is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. EBAY 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, EBAY or MGNI?
MGNI 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, EBAY or MGNI?
MGNI on the Momentum factor, by 13 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, EBAY or MGNI?
EBAY is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. EBAY on Risk Resilience, by 15 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 EBAY more profitable than MGNI?
EBAY leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 72.5% vs 64.8%; operating margin 20.5% vs 15.6%; ttm roe 48.3% vs 18.6%.
Is EBAY's lead over MGNI getting stronger or weaker?
EBAY lead: Reversed — MGNI led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; EBAY now leads by 4. 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 2026-08-26, when EBAY moved ahead of MGNI.
What would change the EBAY vs MGNI verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: MGNI closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 15 points behind, the largest single contributor to EBAY's edge; MGNI's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; EBAY's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; 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 EBAY and MGNI?
EBAY: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. MGNI: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 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 EBAY is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On MGNI it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare EBAY and MGNI 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.