MELI vs SE Stock Comparison
Compare MELI and SE across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between MELI and SE?
MELI leads the current stock comparison as MercadoLibre, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
MercadoLibre, Inc. vs Sea Limited
MELI leads
MELI leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from SE. Wall Street currently favors SE on target upside.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support MELI, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
MercadoLibre, Inc.
Sea Limited
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MELI over SE, 41 versus 40 as of Sep 11, 2026. MELI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum, while SE holds the stronger quality profile. MELI also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors SE. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MELI today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. MELI lead: Reversed — SE led by 9 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; MELI now leads by 1.
Compare MercadoLibre, Inc. and Sea Limited 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 MELI and SE 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.
- Momentum44 vs 30MELI +14
- Quality51 vs 59SE +8
- Value24 vs 26Even
- Risk Resilience48 vs 47Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor MELI. MELI’s edge is concentrated in momentum; SE keeps a meaningful quality 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 +2
New signals
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.54%)
No factor moved materially.
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
MELI's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — MELI and SE both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
MELI (MercadoLibre, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum.
SE (Sea Limited): the counter-case, on 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
MELIMELI on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
MELIMELI on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
MELIMELI on the Momentum factor, by 14 points.
Lower downside
MELIMELI carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
SESE on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors MELI, analyst targets favor SE. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | MELI | SE | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +13.8% | +35.2% | SE has more room |
| Target dispersion | +34.7% | +23.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 2 | 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
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MELI. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 41 vs 40 |
| Fundamentals | MELIon balance | revenue growth 15% vs 9.7%; EPS growth 11.7% vs 2.9%; TTM ROE 26.5% vs 13.5%; gross margin 42.7% vs 44.3%; operating margin 8.3% vs 8% — MELI takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 24 vs 26 |
| Technicals | MELI | Price vs 50-day 1.4% vs -5%; vs 200-day 2.6% vs 2.2% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 48 vs 47 |
| Analyst expectations | SE | Target upside 13.8% vs 35.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of MELI and SE 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 1 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 6 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)
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 MELI.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10MELI lead: Reversed — SE led by 9 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; MELI now leads by 1.
- Today
- MELI +1
- 41 vs 40
- 7 sessions ago
- MELI +9
- 53 vs 44
- 30 sessions ago
- SE +9
- 41 vs 50
- 90 sessions ago
- MELI +1
- 52 vs 51
The lead changed hands 9 times in this window, most recently on Aug 24 when MELI moved ahead of SE.
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 / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.66%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.54%)
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.18%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.90%)
MELI 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 -0.47%, AIQ +1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.35%, 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.
- 1SE closes the Momentum gap — currently 14 points behind, the largest single contributor to MELI's edge.
- 2SE's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3MELI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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
MELI leads on balance| Metric | MELI | SE |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 15% | 9.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 11.7% | 2.9% |
| Gross margin | 42.7% | 44.3% |
| Operating margin | 8.3% | 8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 26.5% | 13.5% |
| Debt to equity | 1.68 | 0.32 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | MELI | SE |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -5% | -4.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 4.3% | -15.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 20% | 30.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 7.9% | 22.6% |
| Year to date | -5.4% | -15.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -18.8% | -43.4% |
Technicals
MELI has the stronger structure| Metric | MELI | SE |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 48.2 | 34.4 |
| ADX (14) | 18.6 | 16.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1.4% | -5% |
| Price vs 200-day | 2.6% | 2.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 37.7% | 40.2% |
Risk
Split| Metric | MELI | SE |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.07 | 1.32 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.42 | -0.97 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.52 | -1.47 |
| Max drawdown | -38.4% | -60.2% |
| Current drawdown | -24.1% | -45.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 41.4% | 50.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.7% | -4.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, MELI or SE?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, MELI is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 41 against SE's 40. The edge comes from momentum. SE is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 MELI or SE the better buy right now?
MELI carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor MELI over SE?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. MELI leads Momentum by 14 points; SE leads Quality by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, MELI or SE?
Analyst price targets imply +13.8% upside for MELI and +35.2% for SE, so the Street currently favors SE. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors MELI. 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, MELI or SE?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. 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, MELI or SE?
MELI 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, MELI or SE?
MELI on the Momentum factor, by 14 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, MELI or SE?
MELI is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. MELI carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is MELI more profitable than SE?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 42.7% vs 44.3%; operating margin 8.3% vs 8%; ttm roe 26.5% vs 13.5%. Each name leads on one measure, 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 MELI's lead over SE getting stronger or weaker?
MELI lead: Reversed — SE led by 9 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; MELI now leads by 1. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 9 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-24, when MELI moved ahead of SE.
What would change the MELI vs SE verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SE closes the Momentum gap — currently 14 points behind, the largest single contributor to MELI's edge; SE's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; MELI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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 MELI and SE?
MELI: 2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. SE: 1 bullish / 2 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 MELI is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On SE it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare MELI and SE 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.