INTU vs NOW Stock Comparison
Compare INTU and NOW across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between INTU and NOW?
INTU leads the current stock comparison as Intuit Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Intuit Inc. vs ServiceNow, Inc.
INTU leads
INTU leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 13 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 5 of 6 evidence groups support INTU, and its lead is narrowing.
Intuit Inc.
ServiceNow, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors INTU over NOW, 61 versus 57 as of Sep 9, 2026. INTU's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while NOW holds the stronger momentum profile. INTU also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor INTU today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. INTU lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 13 to 4 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Intuit Inc. and ServiceNow, 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 INTU and NOW 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.
- Momentum40 vs 82NOW +42
- Value67 vs 37INTU +30
- Quality77 vs 64INTU +13
- Risk Resilience49 vs 40INTU +9
5 of 6 evidence groups favor INTU. INTU’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; NOW keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-07, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-06.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
INTU's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — INTU and NOW both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
INTU (Intuit Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
NOW (ServiceNow, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 62.4% against 47.6%.
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
INTUINTU on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
NOWNOW on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
INTUINTU on the peer-relative Value factor, by 30 points.
Momentum
NOWNOW on the Momentum factor, by 42 points.
Lower downside
INTUINTU on Risk Resilience, by 9 points.
Analyst upside
INTUINTU 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 | INTU | NOW | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +23.8% | +4.7% | INTU has more room |
| Target dispersion | +97% | +115.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 20 | 23 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor INTU. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | INTU | 61 vs 57 |
| Fundamentals | INTUon balance | revenue growth -49.1% vs 5.8%; EPS growth -87.9% vs -35.6%; TTM ROE 23.4% vs 13.8%; gross margin 81.3% vs 74.8%; operating margin 27.4% vs 11.4% — INTU takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | INTU | Value 67 vs 37 |
| Technicals | NOW | Price vs 50-day 1% vs 14.7%; vs 200-day -22.1% vs 19.1% |
| Risk Resilience | INTU | Risk Resilience 49 vs 40 |
| Analyst expectations | INTU | Target upside 23.8% vs 4.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of INTU and NOW 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 4 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (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 INTU.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 28 – Sep 7INTU lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 13 to 4 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- INTU +4
- 61 vs 57
- 7 sessions ago
- INTU +6
- 61 vs 55
- 30 sessions ago
- INTU +13
- 71 vs 58
- 90 sessions ago
- INTU +12
- 65 vs 53
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Jun 8 when INTU moved ahead of NOW.
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.
0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (35.35%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.67%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (1.34%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.82%)
NOW is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
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 -4.14%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -4.99%, AIQ 0 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.
- 1NOW closes the Value gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to INTU's edge.
- 2NOW's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3INTU starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 9 points over 30 sessions, and a further 4-point move would eliminate INTU'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
INTU leads on balance| Metric | INTU | NOW |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -49.1% | 5.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -87.9% | -35.6% |
| Gross margin | 81.3% | 74.8% |
| Operating margin | 27.4% | 11.4% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 23.4% | 13.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.44 | 0.68 |
Performance
NOW leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | INTU | NOW |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -7.1% | -2.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 2.3% | 13.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 12.1% | 25.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -30.9% | 13.6% |
| Year to date | -49.8% | -7.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -50.2% | -23.2% |
Technicals
NOW has the stronger structure| Metric | INTU | NOW |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 48.6 | 68.8 |
| ADX (14) | 18.1 | 26.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1% | 14.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | -22.1% | 19.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 47.6% | 62.4% |
Risk
INTU is the more resilient| Metric | INTU | NOW |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.27 | 0.68 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.27 | -0.21 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.6 | -0.3 |
| Max drawdown | -63.7% | -56.8% |
| Current drawdown | -52.6% | -26.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 48.5% | 56.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5% | -5.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, INTU or NOW?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, INTU is the stronger of the two as of Sep 9, 2026, scoring 61 against NOW's 57. The edge comes from value and quality. NOW 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 INTU or NOW the better buy right now?
INTU carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 9, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 5 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor INTU over NOW?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. NOW leads Momentum by 42 points; INTU leads Value by 30 points; INTU leads Quality by 13 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, INTU or NOW?
Analyst price targets imply +23.8% upside for INTU and +4.7% for NOW, so the Street currently favors INTU. 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, INTU or NOW?
INTU is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. INTU on the peer-relative Value factor, by 30 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, INTU or NOW?
NOW 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, INTU or NOW?
NOW 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, INTU or NOW?
INTU is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. INTU 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 INTU more profitable than NOW?
INTU leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 81.3% vs 74.8%; operating margin 27.4% vs 11.4%; ttm roe 23.4% vs 13.8%.
Is INTU's lead over NOW getting stronger or weaker?
INTU lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 13 to 4 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-28 and 2026-09-07. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-06-08, when INTU moved ahead of NOW.
What would change the INTU vs NOW verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: NOW closes the Value gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to INTU's edge; NOW's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; INTU starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 9 points over 30 sessions, and a further 4-point move would eliminate INTU's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about INTU and NOW?
INTU: 0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral. NOW: 2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. 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 INTU is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On NOW it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare INTU and NOW with others
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.