INTU vs SPY Stock Comparison
INTU currently leads SPY in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 70 vs 65. The clearest difference is value, while SPY has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between INTU and SPY?
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 State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF
INTU leads
INTU leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from SPY.
Fragile: 2 of 4 evidence groups support INTU, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Intuit Inc.
State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors INTU over SPY, 70 versus 65 as of Oct 31, 2026. INTU's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum, while SPY holds the stronger risk resilience profile. INTU also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor INTU today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. INTU lead: Reversed — SPY led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; INTU now leads by 5.
Compare Intuit Inc. and State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF 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 INTU and SPY 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.
- Risk Resilience55 vs 87SPY +32
- Value67 vs 41INTU +26
- Momentum74 vs 59INTU +15
- Quality77 vs 83SPY +6
2 of 4 evidence groups favor INTU. INTU’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum; SPY keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-30, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-29.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Quality -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.
INTU's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — INTU and SPY both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
INTU (Intuit Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and momentum.
SPY (State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF): the counter-case, on risk resilience, quality, technicals.
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
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
INTUINTU on the peer-relative Value factor, by 26 points.
Momentum
INTUINTU on the Momentum factor, by 15 points.
Lower downside
SPYSPY on Risk Resilience, by 32 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | INTU | SPY | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +12.4% | — | Level |
| Target dispersion | +78.3% | — | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | — | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 19 | — | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 4 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 | 70 vs 65 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | INTU | Value 67 vs 41 |
| Technicals | SPY | Price vs 50-day 6.5% vs -1.6%; vs 200-day -9.6% vs 6.1% |
| Risk Resilience | SPY | Risk Resilience 55 vs 87 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of INTU and SPY 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 5 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (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 INTU.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jul 1 – Oct 30INTU lead: Reversed — SPY led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; INTU now leads by 5.
- Today
- INTU +5
- 70 vs 65
- 7 sessions ago
- INTU +15
- 74 vs 59
- 30 sessions ago
- SPY +3
- 65 vs 68
- 90 sessions ago
- INTU +2
- 66 vs 64
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Oct 14 when INTU moved ahead of SPY.
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.
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only INTU
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (13.31%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.88%)
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only SPY
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (5.42%)
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (0.90%)
- EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (1.1%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
INTU 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 +2.99%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.77%, 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.
- 1SPY closes the Value gap — currently 26 points behind, the largest single contributor to INTU's edge.
- 2SPY generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover or EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish.
- 3INTU's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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 | INTU | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -49.1% | — |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -87.9% | — |
| Gross margin | 81.3% | — |
| Operating margin | 27.4% | — |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 23.4% | — |
| Debt to equity | 0.44 | — |
Performance
SPY leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | INTU | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.2% | -0.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 19% | 1.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 4% | 4.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -16.9% | 8.5% |
| Year to date | -50.5% | 13.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -52% | 14% |
Technicals
SPY has the stronger structure| Metric | INTU | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 62.3 | 48.6 |
| ADX (14) | 26.5 | 14 |
| Price vs 50-day | 6.5% | -1.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -9.6% | 6.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 41% | 10% |
Risk
SPY is the more resilient| Metric | INTU | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.21 | 1 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.25 | 0.68 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.67 | 1.04 |
| Max drawdown | -62.4% | -9.1% |
| Current drawdown | -51.7% | -0.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 50.8% | 12.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5% | -1.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, INTU or SPY?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, INTU is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 70 against SPY's 65. The edge comes from value and momentum. SPY 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 INTU or SPY the better buy right now?
INTU carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor INTU over SPY?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. SPY leads Risk Resilience by 32 points; INTU leads Value by 26 points; INTU leads Momentum by 15 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, INTU or SPY?
Analyst price targets imply +12.4% upside for INTU and not covered for SPY. 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 SPY?
INTU is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. INTU on the peer-relative Value factor, by 26 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 SPY?
Growth figures are not covered for both names. 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 SPY?
INTU on the Momentum factor, by 15 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 SPY?
SPY is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SPY on Risk Resilience, by 32 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 SPY?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is INTU's lead over SPY getting stronger or weaker?
INTU lead: Reversed — SPY led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; INTU now leads by 5. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-07-01 and 2026-10-30. The lead has changed hands 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-14, when INTU moved ahead of SPY.
What would change the INTU vs SPY verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SPY closes the Value gap — currently 26 points behind, the largest single contributor to INTU's edge; SPY generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover or EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish; INTU's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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 INTU and SPY?
INTU: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. SPY: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 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 SPY it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
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.