ESTC vs FROG Stock Comparison
ESTC currently leads FROG in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 72 vs 50. The clearest difference is quality.
What is the main difference between ESTC and FROG?
ESTC leads the current stock comparison as Elastic N.V., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Elastic N.V. vs JFrog Ltd.
ESTC leads
ESTC leads by 22 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Value. Wall Street currently favors FROG on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support ESTC, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Elastic N.V.
JFrog Ltd.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ESTC over FROG, 72 versus 50 as of Oct 31, 2026. ESTC's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and value. ESTC also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors FROG. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ESTC today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. ESTC lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 22 points over 30 sessions. ESTC 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 Elastic N.V. and JFrog Ltd. 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 ESTC and FROG 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.
- Quality95 vs 60ESTC +35
- Value49 vs 24ESTC +25
- Momentum77 vs 66ESTC +11
- Risk Resilience61 vs 52ESTC +9
4 of 6 evidence groups favor ESTC. ESTC’s edge is concentrated in quality and value.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 8 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +1
New signals
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (2.2%)
ESTC's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ESTC and FROG both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ESTC (Elastic N.V.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and value.
FROG (JFrog Ltd.): the counter-case, on analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 70% against 43.8%.
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
ESTCESTC on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
FROGFROG on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
ESTCESTC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 25 points.
Momentum
ESTCESTC on the Momentum factor, by 11 points.
Lower downside
ESTCESTC on Risk Resilience, by 9 points.
Analyst upside
FROGFROG on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors ESTC, analyst targets favor FROG. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | ESTC | FROG | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -10% | +5.4% | FROG has more room |
| Target dispersion | +74.2% | +50.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 9 | 16 | 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 ESTC. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | ESTC | 72 vs 50 |
| Fundamentals | Even | revenue growth 6.1% vs 6.4%; EPS growth -103.8% vs 56.4%; TTM ROE 35.3% vs -4.9%; gross margin 75.5% vs 77.9%; operating margin -1.5% vs -11.2% |
| Valuation | ESTC | Value 49 vs 24 |
| Technicals | ESTC | Price vs 50-day 6.1% vs 0.6%; vs 200-day 59% vs 40.7% |
| Risk Resilience | ESTC | Risk Resilience 61 vs 52 |
| Analyst expectations | FROG | Target upside -10% vs 5.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ESTC and FROG and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 22 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. (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 ESTC.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28ESTC lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 22 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- ESTC +22
- 72 vs 50
- 7 sessions ago
- ESTC +21
- 70 vs 49
- 30 sessions ago
- ESTC +20
- 71 vs 51
- 90 sessions ago
- ESTC +18
- 70 vs 52
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.
6 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only ESTC
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
5 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
No signal that the other name lacks.
Both carry 6 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode, EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish, 52-Week High Proximity, Uptrend Structure Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
ESTC 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 -5.83%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -4.49%, 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.
- 1FROG closes the Quality gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to ESTC's edge.
- 2FROG's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed.
- 3ESTC's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 6 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
Split| Metric | ESTC | FROG |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 6.1% | 6.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -103.8% | 56.4% |
| Gross margin | 75.5% | 77.9% |
| Operating margin | -1.5% | -11.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 35.3% | -4.9% |
| Debt to equity | 0.02 | 0.02 |
Performance
ESTC leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | ESTC | FROG |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 7.9% | 4.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 16.2% | 3.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 65.9% | 28.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 122.8% | 117.1% |
| Year to date | 35.5% | 60.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 20.8% | 101.6% |
Technicals
ESTC has the stronger structure| Metric | ESTC | FROG |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 65.1 | 53.1 |
| ADX (14) | 41.4 | 13.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | 6.1% | 0.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 59% | 40.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 43.8% | 70% |
Risk
ESTC is the more resilient| Metric | ESTC | FROG |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.16 | 1.43 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.57 | 1.24 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.8 | 1.99 |
| Max drawdown | -54.2% | -49.6% |
| Current drawdown | 0% | -3.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 57.8% | 75.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.4% | -6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ESTC or FROG?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ESTC is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 72 against FROG's 50. The edge comes from quality and value. 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 ESTC or FROG the better buy right now?
ESTC carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor ESTC over FROG?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. ESTC leads Quality by 35 points; ESTC leads Value by 25 points; ESTC leads Momentum by 11 points. ESTC leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so the sweep is not explained by FROG 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, ESTC or FROG?
Analyst price targets imply -10% upside for ESTC and +5.4% for FROG, so the Street currently favors FROG. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors ESTC. 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, ESTC or FROG?
ESTC is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. ESTC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 25 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, ESTC or FROG?
FROG 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, ESTC or FROG?
ESTC on the Momentum factor, by 11 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, ESTC or FROG?
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 ESTC more profitable than FROG?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 75.5% vs 77.9%; operating margin -1.5% vs -11.2%; ttm roe 35.3% vs -4.9%. ESTC leads on two measures and FROG 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 ESTC's lead over FROG getting stronger or weaker?
ESTC lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 22 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 ESTC vs FROG verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: FROG closes the Quality gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to ESTC's edge; FROG's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed; ESTC's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 6 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 ESTC and FROG?
ESTC: 6 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. FROG: 5 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 ESTC is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On FROG it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare ESTC and FROG 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.