GPN vs HOOD Stock Comparison
Compare GPN and HOOD across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between GPN and HOOD?
GPN leads the current stock comparison as Global Payments Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Global Payments Inc. vs Robinhood Markets, Inc.
GPN leads
GPN leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Risk Resilience, but the lead has narrowed from 16 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support GPN, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Global Payments Inc.
Robinhood Markets, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors GPN over HOOD, 52 versus 46 as of Sep 11, 2026. GPN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and risk resilience, while HOOD holds the stronger momentum profile. GPN also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor GPN today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. GPN lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 16 to 6 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Global Payments 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 GPN 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.
- Value65 vs 24GPN +41
- Momentum50 vs 76HOOD +26
- Risk Resilience47 vs 27GPN +20
- Quality44 vs 53HOOD +9
4 of 6 evidence groups favor GPN. GPN’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 +3
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -3
No new signals fired.
GPN's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — GPN and HOOD both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
GPN (Global Payments Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and risk resilience.
HOOD (Robinhood Markets, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, quality, fundamentals — but at materially higher volatility, 95.2% against 37.2%.
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
GPNGPN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
GPNGPN on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
GPNGPN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 41 points.
Momentum
HOODHOOD on the Momentum factor, by 26 points.
Lower downside
GPNGPN on Risk Resilience, by 20 points.
Analyst upside
GPNGPN 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 | GPN | HOOD | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +6.5% | +1.8% | GPN has more room |
| Target dispersion | +63.8% | +68% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 13 | 15 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor GPN. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | GPN | 52 vs 46 |
| Fundamentals | HOODon balance | revenue growth 11.8% vs -49.9%; EPS growth 100.7% vs 59%; TTM ROE -4.1% vs 22.7%; gross margin 63.9% vs 78.7%; operating margin 11.9% vs 30.9% — HOOD takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | GPN | Value 65 vs 24 |
| Technicals | HOOD | Price vs 50-day 3.1% vs 8.9%; vs 200-day 16.6% vs 19.1% |
| Risk Resilience | GPN | Risk Resilience 47 vs 27 |
| Analyst expectations | GPN | Target upside 6.5% vs 1.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of GPN 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 moderate at 6 points.
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 GPN.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10GPN lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 16 to 6 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- GPN +6
- 52 vs 46
- 7 sessions ago
- GPN +9
- 57 vs 48
- 30 sessions ago
- GPN +16
- 57 vs 41
- 90 sessions ago
- GPN +15
- 61 vs 46
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Jun 24 when GPN 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.
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (12.85%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium 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
GPN 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 down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.29%, AIQ +1 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 41 points behind, the largest single contributor to GPN'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.
- 3GPN'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 10 points over 30 sessions, and a further 6-point move would eliminate GPN'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 | GPN | HOOD |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 11.8% | -49.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 100.7% | 59% |
| Gross margin | 63.9% | 78.7% |
| Operating margin | 11.9% | 30.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -4.1% | 22.7% |
| Debt to equity | 0.97 | 2.92 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | GPN | HOOD |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -4.6% | 5.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 0% | 19.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 39.1% | 31.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 21.6% | 44% |
| Year to date | 14.4% | 0.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 1.3% | -3.4% |
Technicals
HOOD has the stronger structure| Metric | GPN | HOOD |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 39.6 | 62.9 |
| ADX (14) | 33.9 | 22.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | 3.1% | 8.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 16.6% | 19.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 37.2% | 95.2% |
Risk
GPN is the more resilient| Metric | GPN | HOOD |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.1 | 3.15 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.15 | 0.24 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.25 | 0.41 |
| Max drawdown | -29.4% | -57.3% |
| Current drawdown | -6.6% | -25.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 40.6% | 72.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.5% | -7.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, GPN or HOOD?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, GPN is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 52 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 GPN or HOOD the better buy right now?
GPN carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 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 GPN over HOOD?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. GPN leads Value by 41 points; HOOD leads Momentum by 26 points; GPN leads Risk Resilience by 20 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, GPN or HOOD?
Analyst price targets imply +6.5% upside for GPN and +1.8% for HOOD, so the Street currently favors GPN. 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, GPN or HOOD?
GPN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. GPN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 41 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, GPN or HOOD?
GPN 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, GPN or HOOD?
HOOD on the Momentum factor, by 26 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, GPN or HOOD?
GPN is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. GPN on Risk Resilience, by 20 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 GPN more profitable than HOOD?
HOOD leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 63.9% vs 78.7%; operating margin 11.9% vs 30.9%; ttm roe -4.1% vs 22.7%.
Is GPN's lead over HOOD getting stronger or weaker?
GPN lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 16 to 6 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 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-06-24, when GPN moved ahead of HOOD.
What would change the GPN 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 41 points behind, the largest single contributor to GPN'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; GPN'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 10 points over 30 sessions, and a further 6-point move would eliminate GPN's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about GPN and HOOD?
GPN: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, 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 GPN is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On HOOD it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare GPN 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.