NBIS vs RZLV Stock Comparison
Compare NBIS and RZLV across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between NBIS and RZLV?
NBIS leads the current stock comparison as Nebius Group N.V., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Nebius Group N.V. vs Rezolve AI PLC
NBIS leads
NBIS leads by 10 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience. Wall Street currently favors RZLV on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support NBIS, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Nebius Group N.V.
Rezolve AI PLC
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors NBIS over RZLV, 47 versus 37 as of Sep 11, 2026. NBIS's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience, while RZLV holds the stronger quality profile. NBIS also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors RZLV. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor NBIS today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. NBIS lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 10 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Nebius Group N.V. and Rezolve AI PLC 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 NBIS and RZLV 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.
- Momentum70 vs 37NBIS +33
- Risk Resilience44 vs 20NBIS +24
- Quality43 vs 50RZLV +7
- Value34 vs 34Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor NBIS. NBIS’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience; RZLV 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 -5
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +1
No new signals fired.
NBIS's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — NBIS and RZLV both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
NBIS (Nebius Group N.V.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.
RZLV (Rezolve AI PLC): the counter-case, on quality, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 108.7% against 80.9%.
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
NBISNBIS on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
RZLVRZLV on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
NBISNBIS on the Momentum factor, by 33 points.
Lower downside
NBISNBIS on Risk Resilience, by 24 points.
Analyst upside
RZLVRZLV on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors NBIS, analyst targets favor RZLV. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | NBIS | RZLV | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +9.6% | +183.8% | RZLV has more room |
| Target dispersion | +114.2% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 1 | 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
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor NBIS. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | NBIS | 47 vs 37 |
| Fundamentals | Even | revenue growth 45.9% vs 5.4%; EPS growth -128.3% vs 45.8%; gross margin 58.6% vs 66%; operating margin -49.3% vs -185.6% |
| Valuation | Even | Value 34 vs 34 |
| Technicals | NBIS | Price vs 50-day 6% vs -9.9%; vs 200-day 45.3% vs -14.2% |
| Risk Resilience | NBIS | Risk Resilience 44 vs 20 |
| Analyst expectations | RZLV | Target upside 9.6% vs 183.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of NBIS and RZLV 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 10 points.
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 NBIS.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10NBIS lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 10 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- NBIS +10
- 47 vs 37
- 7 sessions ago
- NBIS +4
- 40 vs 36
- 30 sessions ago
- NBIS +9
- 52 vs 43
- 90 sessions ago
- RZLV +10
- 35 vs 45
The lead changed hands 9 times in this window, most recently on Sep 4 when NBIS moved ahead of RZLV.
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.
4 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (34.89%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
0 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (5.54%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -1.56%, AIQ -1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.43%, 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.
- 1RZLV closes the Momentum gap — currently 33 points behind, the largest single contributor to NBIS's edge.
- 2RZLV's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3NBIS's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 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 | NBIS | RZLV |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 45.9% | 5.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -128.3% | 45.8% |
| Gross margin | 58.6% | 66% |
| Operating margin | -49.3% | -185.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 0.9% | -87.2% |
| Debt to equity | 0.97 | 0.64 |
Performance
NBIS leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | NBIS | RZLV |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 11.8% | -1.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -12% | -14.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 7.8% | -3.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 103.7% | -18.4% |
| Year to date | 172.5% | -10.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 256.1% | -48.2% |
Technicals
NBIS has the stronger structure| Metric | NBIS | RZLV |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 53.6 | 44.6 |
| ADX (14) | 11.2 | 19.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | 6% | -9.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 45.3% | -14.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 80.9% | 108.7% |
Risk
NBIS is the more resilient| Metric | NBIS | RZLV |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 3.55 | 2.93 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.29 | -0.34 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.49 | -0.64 |
| Max drawdown | -48.3% | -72.2% |
| Current drawdown | -20.4% | -70.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 108.9% | 107.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -9.4% | -9.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, NBIS or RZLV?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, NBIS is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 47 against RZLV's 37. The edge comes from momentum and risk resilience. RZLV 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 NBIS or RZLV the better buy right now?
NBIS carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor NBIS over RZLV?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. NBIS leads Momentum by 33 points; NBIS leads Risk Resilience by 24 points; RZLV leads Quality by 7 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, NBIS or RZLV?
Analyst price targets imply +9.6% upside for NBIS and +183.8% for RZLV, so the Street currently favors RZLV. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors NBIS. 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, NBIS or RZLV?
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, NBIS or RZLV?
RZLV 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, NBIS or RZLV?
NBIS on the Momentum factor, by 33 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, NBIS or RZLV?
NBIS is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. NBIS on Risk Resilience, by 24 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 NBIS more profitable than RZLV?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 58.6% vs 66%; operating margin -49.3% vs -185.6%; ttm roe 0.9% vs -87.2%. 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 NBIS's lead over RZLV getting stronger or weaker?
NBIS lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 10 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 9 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-04, when NBIS moved ahead of RZLV.
What would change the NBIS vs RZLV verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: RZLV closes the Momentum gap — currently 33 points behind, the largest single contributor to NBIS's edge; RZLV's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; NBIS's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; 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 NBIS and RZLV?
NBIS: 4 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. RZLV: 0 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral. The most decision-relevant rule on NBIS is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On RZLV it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare NBIS and RZLV 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.