FRO vs STEP Stock Comparison
FRO currently leads STEP in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 63 vs 57. The clearest difference is value, while STEP has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between FRO and STEP?
FRO leads the current stock comparison as Frontline Plc, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Frontline Plc vs StepStone Group Inc.
FRO leads
FRO leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum, but the lead has narrowed from 14 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors STEP on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support FRO, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Frontline Plc
StepStone Group Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors FRO over STEP, 63 versus 57 as of Oct 21, 2026. FRO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum, while STEP holds the stronger risk resilience profile. FRO also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors STEP. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor FRO today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. FRO lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 6 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Frontline Plc and StepStone Group 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 FRO and STEP 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.
- Value64 vs 30FRO +34
- Risk Resilience29 vs 58STEP +29
- Momentum61 vs 40FRO +21
- Quality82 vs 97STEP +15
4 of 6 evidence groups favor FRO. FRO’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum; STEP 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 -3
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +2
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
FRO's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — FRO and STEP both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
FRO (Frontline Plc): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and momentum.
STEP (StepStone Group Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, quality, 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
FROFRO on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
FROFRO on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
FROFRO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 34 points.
Momentum
FROFRO on the Momentum factor, by 21 points.
Lower downside
STEPSTEP on Risk Resilience, by 29 points.
Analyst upside
STEPSTEP on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors FRO, analyst targets favor STEP. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | FRO | STEP | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +36.5% | +46.2% | STEP has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +56.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 8 | 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 FRO. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | FRO | 63 vs 57 |
| Fundamentals | FROon balance | revenue growth 32.1% vs -35.6%; EPS growth 17.9% vs -13.5%; TTM ROE 54.9% vs 156.7%; gross margin 51.5% vs 60.9%; operating margin 49.4% vs -58.2% — FRO takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | FRO | Value 64 vs 30 |
| Technicals | FRO | Price vs 50-day 6.2% vs -10%; vs 200-day 32.4% vs -15.1% |
| Risk Resilience | STEP | Risk Resilience 29 vs 58 |
| Analyst expectations | STEP | Target upside 36.5% vs 46.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of FRO and STEP 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 moderate at 6 points.
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (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 FRO.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20FRO lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 6 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- FRO +6
- 63 vs 57
- 7 sessions ago
- FRO +10
- 66 vs 56
- 30 sessions ago
- FRO +14
- 66 vs 52
- 90 sessions ago
- FRO +5
- 65 vs 60
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Aug 11 when STEP moved ahead of FRO.
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.
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only FRO
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (27.07%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
0 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral
Only STEP
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (7.28%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode, MACD Bearish Crossover.
FRO 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 is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.93%, AIQ -1 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.26%, 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.
- 1STEP closes the Value gap — currently 34 points behind, the largest single contributor to FRO's edge.
- 2STEP's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3FRO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 8 points over 30 sessions, and a further 6-point move would eliminate FRO'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
FRO leads on balance| Metric | FRO | STEP |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 32.1% | -35.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 17.9% | -13.5% |
| Gross margin | 51.5% | 60.9% |
| Operating margin | 49.4% | -58.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 54.9% | 156.7% |
| Debt to equity | 0.77 | -2.91 |
Performance
FRO leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | FRO | STEP |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -14.7% | 1.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 5% | -7.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 32.6% | 4.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 42.2% | -22.4% |
| Year to date | 130.6% | -33.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 118.7% | -30.5% |
Technicals
FRO has the stronger structure| Metric | FRO | STEP |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 52.5 | 48.1 |
| ADX (14) | 33.3 | 16.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 6.2% | -10% |
| Price vs 200-day | 32.4% | -15.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 49.2% | 35.4% |
Risk
STEP is the more resilient| Metric | FRO | STEP |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.48 | 1.67 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.87 | -0.6 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.91 | -0.89 |
| Max drawdown | -23.8% | -48.2% |
| Current drawdown | -15% | -43.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 44.4% | 47.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.5% | -4.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, FRO or STEP?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, FRO is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 63 against STEP's 57. The edge comes from value and momentum. STEP 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 FRO or STEP the better buy right now?
FRO 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 FRO over STEP?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. FRO leads Value by 34 points; STEP leads Risk Resilience by 29 points; FRO leads Momentum by 21 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, FRO or STEP?
Analyst price targets imply +36.5% upside for FRO and +46.2% for STEP, so the Street currently favors STEP. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors FRO. 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, FRO or STEP?
FRO is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. FRO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 34 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, FRO or STEP?
FRO 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, FRO or STEP?
FRO on the Momentum factor, by 21 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, FRO or STEP?
STEP is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. STEP on Risk Resilience, by 29 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 FRO more profitable than STEP?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 51.5% vs 60.9%; operating margin 49.4% vs -58.2%; ttm roe 54.9% vs 156.7%. FRO leads on one measure and STEP 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 FRO's lead over STEP getting stronger or weaker?
FRO lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 6 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 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-11, when STEP moved ahead of FRO.
What would change the FRO vs STEP verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: STEP closes the Value gap — currently 34 points behind, the largest single contributor to FRO's edge; STEP's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; FRO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 8 points over 30 sessions, and a further 6-point move would eliminate FRO's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about FRO and STEP?
FRO: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. STEP: 0 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 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 FRO is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On STEP it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare FRO and STEP 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.