FIVE vs GAP Stock Comparison
GAP currently leads FIVE in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 61 vs 48. The clearest difference is value, while FIVE has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between FIVE and GAP?
GAP leads the current stock comparison as The Gap, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Five Below, Inc. vs The Gap, Inc.
GAP leads
GAP leads by 13 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum, but the lead has narrowed from 23 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors FIVE on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support GAP, and its lead is narrowing.
Five Below, Inc.
The Gap, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors GAP over FIVE, 61 versus 48 as of Oct 21, 2026. GAP's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum, while FIVE holds the stronger risk resilience profile. GAP also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors FIVE. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor GAP today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. GAP lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 23 to 13 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Five Below, Inc. and The Gap, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare FIVE and GAP 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.
- Value27 vs 67GAP +40
- Risk Resilience62 vs 40FIVE +22
- Momentum58 vs 68GAP +10
- Quality54 vs 61GAP +7
4 of 6 evidence groups favor GAP. GAP’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum; FIVE keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
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 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +6
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
GAP's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — FIVE and GAP both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
GAP (The Gap, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and momentum.
FIVE (Five Below, Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, analyst expectations.
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
GAPGAP on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
GAPGAP on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
GAPGAP on the peer-relative Value factor, by 40 points.
Momentum
GAPGAP on the Momentum factor, by 10 points.
Lower downside
FIVEFIVE on Risk Resilience, by 22 points.
Analyst upside
FIVEFIVE on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors GAP, analyst targets favor FIVE. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | FIVE | GAP | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +25.4% | +10.5% | FIVE has more room |
| Target dispersion | +73% | +87.8% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 16 | 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 GAP. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | GAP | 48 vs 61 |
| Fundamentals | GAP | revenue growth -25.6% vs 4.4%; EPS growth -48.4% vs 53.3%; TTM ROE 21.1% vs 33.1%; gross margin 34.8% vs 43.3%; operating margin 11% vs 11% |
| Valuation | GAP | Value 27 vs 67 |
| Technicals | GAP | Price vs 50-day -4.1% vs 4.1%; vs 200-day 3.3% vs 0.7% |
| Risk Resilience | FIVE | Risk Resilience 62 vs 40 |
| Analyst expectations | FIVE | Target upside 25.4% vs 10.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of FIVE and GAP 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 13 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (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)
- 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 GAP.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20GAP lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 23 to 13 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- GAP +13
- 48 vs 61
- 7 sessions ago
- GAP +16
- 46 vs 62
- 30 sessions ago
- GAP +23
- 38 vs 61
- 90 sessions ago
- FIVE +3
- 55 vs 52
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Aug 24 when GAP moved ahead of FIVE.
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
Only FIVE
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (7.95%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.58%)
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral
Only GAP
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (7.02%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
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 +0.13%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -3.32%, 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.
- 1FIVE closes the Value gap — currently 40 points behind, the largest single contributor to GAP's edge.
- 2FIVE's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3GAP starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 10 points over 30 sessions, and a further 13-point move would eliminate GAP'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
GAP leads on balance| Metric | FIVE | GAP |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -25.6% | 4.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -48.4% | 53.3% |
| Gross margin | 34.8% | 43.3% |
| Operating margin | 11% | 11% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 21.1% | 33.1% |
| Debt to equity | 0.86 | 1.45 |
Performance
FIVE leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | FIVE | GAP |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 4.9% | 2.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -3.7% | 9.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 9.2% | 19.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -5.6% | -11.9% |
| Year to date | 18.8% | -8.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 47.3% | 13.7% |
Technicals
GAP has the stronger structure| Metric | FIVE | GAP |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 54.6 | 57.1 |
| ADX (14) | 22.8 | 26.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -4.1% | 4.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 3.3% | 0.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 30.5% | 33.5% |
Risk
FIVE is the more resilient| Metric | FIVE | GAP |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.83 | 1.17 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.07 | 0.33 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.48 | 0.45 |
| Max drawdown | -28.9% | -37% |
| Current drawdown | -14.8% | -19.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 38.4% | 46.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.3% | -3.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, FIVE or GAP?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, GAP is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 61 against FIVE's 48. The edge comes from value and momentum. FIVE is not without a case — it holds the better risk resilience 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 FIVE or GAP the better buy right now?
GAP carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor GAP over FIVE?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. GAP leads Value by 40 points; FIVE leads Risk Resilience by 22 points; GAP leads Momentum by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, FIVE or GAP?
Analyst price targets imply +25.4% upside for FIVE and +10.5% for GAP, so the Street currently favors FIVE. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors GAP. 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, FIVE or GAP?
GAP is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. GAP on the peer-relative Value factor, by 40 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, FIVE or GAP?
GAP 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, FIVE or GAP?
GAP on the Momentum factor, by 10 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, FIVE or GAP?
FIVE is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. FIVE on Risk Resilience, by 22 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 FIVE more profitable than GAP?
GAP leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 34.8% vs 43.3%; operating margin 11% vs 11%; ttm roe 21.1% vs 33.1%.
Is GAP's lead over FIVE getting stronger or weaker?
GAP lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 23 to 13 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-24, when GAP moved ahead of FIVE.
What would change the FIVE vs GAP verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: FIVE closes the Value gap — currently 40 points behind, the largest single contributor to GAP's edge; FIVE's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; GAP starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 10 points over 30 sessions, and a further 13-point move would eliminate GAP's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about FIVE and GAP?
FIVE: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. GAP: 0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral. The most decision-relevant rule on FIVE is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On GAP it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare FIVE and GAP 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.