ENVA vs HOOD Stock Comparison
Compare ENVA and HOOD across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between ENVA and HOOD?
ENVA leads the current stock comparison as Enova International, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Enova International, Inc. vs Robinhood Markets, Inc.
ENVA leads
ENVA leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Risk Resilience, but the lead has narrowed from 12 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support ENVA, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Enova International, Inc.
Robinhood Markets, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ENVA over HOOD, 49 versus 46 as of Sep 11, 2026. ENVA's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and risk resilience, while HOOD holds the stronger momentum profile. ENVA also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ENVA today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. ENVA lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 12 to 3 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Enova International, Inc. and Robinhood Markets, 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 ENVA and HOOD 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.
- Momentum34 vs 76HOOD +42
- Value52 vs 24ENVA +28
- Risk Resilience53 vs 27ENVA +26
- Quality56 vs 53Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor ENVA. ENVA’s edge is concentrated in value and risk resilience; HOOD 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 +9
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -3
No new signals fired.
The lead changed hands: ENVA moved ahead of HOOD in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ENVA and HOOD both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ENVA (Enova International, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and risk resilience.
HOOD (Robinhood Markets, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, fundamentals, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 95.2% against 36.8%.
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
ENVAENVA on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
HOODHOOD on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
ENVAENVA on the peer-relative Value factor, by 28 points.
Momentum
HOODHOOD on the Momentum factor, by 42 points.
Lower downside
ENVAENVA on Risk Resilience, by 26 points.
Analyst upside
ENVAENVA 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 | ENVA | HOOD | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +11.2% | +1.8% | ENVA has more room |
| Target dispersion | +33.4% | +68% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 5 | 15 | 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 ENVA. 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 | 49 vs 46 |
| Fundamentals | HOODon balance | revenue growth -43.6% vs -49.9%; EPS growth 15.3% vs 59%; TTM ROE 25.8% vs 22.7%; gross margin 74% vs 78.7%; operating margin 27.6% vs 30.9% — HOOD takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | ENVA | Value 52 vs 24 |
| Technicals | HOOD | Price vs 50-day -7.3% vs 8.9%; vs 200-day 24.6% vs 19.1% |
| Risk Resilience | ENVA | Risk Resilience 53 vs 27 |
| Analyst expectations | ENVA | Target upside 11.2% vs 1.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ENVA and HOOD 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 3 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. (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 ENVA.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10ENVA lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 12 to 3 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- ENVA +3
- 49 vs 46
- 7 sessions ago
- HOOD +2
- 46 vs 48
- 30 sessions ago
- ENVA +12
- 53 vs 41
- 90 sessions ago
- ENVA +14
- 60 vs 46
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Sep 10 when ENVA moved ahead of HOOD.
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.
1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (34.73%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
4 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (8.64%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
ENVA 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 and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.19%, AIQ +3 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -0.67%, 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.
- 1HOOD closes the Value gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to ENVA's edge.
- 2HOOD's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed.
- 3ENVA's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 9 points over 30 sessions, and a further 3-point move would eliminate ENVA's advantage entirely.
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
HOOD leads on balance| Metric | ENVA | HOOD |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -43.6% | -49.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 15.3% | 59% |
| Gross margin | 74% | 78.7% |
| Operating margin | 27.6% | 30.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 25.8% | 22.7% |
| Debt to equity | 3.37 | 2.92 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | ENVA | HOOD |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.7% | 5.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -14.3% | 19.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 24% | 31.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 60% | 44% |
| Year to date | 41.9% | 0.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 88.4% | -3.4% |
Technicals
HOOD has the stronger structure| Metric | ENVA | HOOD |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 38.1 | 62.9 |
| ADX (14) | 26.9 | 22.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -7.3% | 8.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 24.6% | 19.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 36.8% | 95.2% |
Risk
ENVA is the more resilient| Metric | ENVA | HOOD |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.22 | 3.15 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.69 | 0.24 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.87 | 0.41 |
| Max drawdown | -24.8% | -57.3% |
| Current drawdown | -16% | -25.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 40.7% | 72.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.4% | -7.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ENVA or HOOD?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ENVA is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 49 against HOOD's 46. The edge comes from value and risk resilience. HOOD 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 ENVA or HOOD the better buy right now?
ENVA 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 3 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor ENVA over HOOD?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. HOOD leads Momentum by 42 points; ENVA leads Value by 28 points; ENVA leads Risk Resilience by 26 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ENVA or HOOD?
Analyst price targets imply +11.2% upside for ENVA and +1.8% for HOOD, so the Street currently favors ENVA. 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, ENVA or HOOD?
ENVA is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. ENVA on the peer-relative Value factor, by 28 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, ENVA or HOOD?
HOOD 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, ENVA or HOOD?
HOOD on the Momentum factor, by 42 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, ENVA or HOOD?
ENVA is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ENVA on Risk Resilience, by 26 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 ENVA more profitable than HOOD?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 74% vs 78.7%; operating margin 27.6% vs 30.9%; ttm roe 25.8% vs 22.7%. ENVA leads on one measure and HOOD 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 ENVA's lead over HOOD getting stronger or weaker?
ENVA lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 12 to 3 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-09-10, when ENVA moved ahead of HOOD.
What would change the ENVA vs HOOD verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: HOOD closes the Value gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to ENVA's edge; HOOD's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed; ENVA's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 9 points over 30 sessions, and a further 3-point move would eliminate ENVA's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about ENVA and HOOD?
ENVA: 1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. HOOD: 4 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 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 ENVA is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On HOOD it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare ENVA and HOOD 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.