NOW vs PANW Stock Comparison
NOW currently leads PANW in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 57 vs 36. The clearest difference is momentum.
What is the main difference between NOW and PANW?
NOW leads the current stock comparison as ServiceNow, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
ServiceNow, Inc. vs Palo Alto Networks, Inc.
NOW leads
NOW leads by 21 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from PANW.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support NOW, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
ServiceNow, Inc.
Palo Alto Networks, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors NOW over PANW, 57 versus 36 as of Oct 21, 2026. NOW's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value. NOW also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor NOW today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. NOW lead: Reversed — PANW led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; NOW now leads by 21.
Compare ServiceNow, Inc. and Palo Alto Networks, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price return from daily closes; distributions are not included.
Price return comparison
Growth of $10,000, price only
Split-adjusted closes only. Distributions are excluded, which understates the return of any fund or stock that pays them.
Compare NOW and PANW 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.
- Momentum81 vs 16NOW +65
- Value37 vs 24NOW +13
- Quality64 vs 60NOW +4
- Risk Resilience46 vs 44Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor NOW. NOW’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -5
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
NOW's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — NOW and PANW both carry a full feed there.
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
NOWNOW on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
NOWNOW on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
NOWNOW on the peer-relative Value factor, by 13 points.
Momentum
NOWNOW on the Momentum factor, by 65 points.
Lower downside
NOWNOW carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
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 | NOW | PANW | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +4.3% | +4% | Level |
| Target dispersion | +86.4% | +85.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 20 | 37 | 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 NOW. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | NOW | 57 vs 36 |
| Fundamentals | NOWon balance | revenue growth 5.8% vs 15.7%; EPS growth -35.6% vs -147.5%; TTM ROE 13.8% vs 1.7%; gross margin 74.8% vs 70.4%; operating margin 11.4% vs 6% — NOW takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | NOW | Value 37 vs 24 |
| Technicals | NOW | Price vs 50-day 12.8% vs -6.7%; vs 200-day 28.8% vs 29.7% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 46 vs 44 |
| Analyst expectations | Even | Target upside 4.3% vs 4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of NOW and PANW 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 wide at 21 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has swung materially session to session. (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 NOW.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20NOW lead: Reversed — PANW led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; NOW now leads by 21.
- Today
- NOW +21
- 57 vs 36
- 7 sessions ago
- NOW +17
- 57 vs 40
- 30 sessions ago
- PANW +4
- 50 vs 54
- 90 sessions ago
- PANW +2
- 53 vs 55
The lead changed hands 7 times in this window, most recently on Aug 19 when NOW moved ahead of PANW.
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 / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only NOW
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only PANW
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode.
NOW 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 +2.39%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +2.05%, 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.
- 1PANW closes the Momentum gap — currently 65 points behind, the largest single contributor to NOW's edge.
- 2PANW's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3NOW's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 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
NOW leads on balance| Metric | NOW | PANW |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 5.8% | 15.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -35.6% | -147.5% |
| Gross margin | 74.8% | 70.4% |
| Operating margin | 11.4% | 6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 13.8% | 1.7% |
| Debt to equity | 0.68 | 0.09 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | NOW | PANW |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 7.9% | -14.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 9.2% | -9.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 49.1% | 1.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 49.3% | 94.5% |
| Year to date | -2.4% | 84.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -16.4% | 65.6% |
Technicals
NOW has the stronger structure| Metric | NOW | PANW |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 69.3 | 31.6 |
| ADX (14) | 24.7 | 19.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | 12.8% | -6.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | 28.8% | 29.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 40.7% | 55.5% |
Risk
Split| Metric | NOW | PANW |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.63 | 1.29 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.1 | 1.17 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.15 | 1.91 |
| Max drawdown | -55.9% | -36% |
| Current drawdown | -20.6% | -19% |
| Annualized volatility | 58% | 49.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.8% | -4.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, NOW or PANW?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, NOW is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 57 against PANW's 36. The edge comes from momentum and value. 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 NOW or PANW the better buy right now?
NOW carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor NOW over PANW?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. NOW leads Momentum by 65 points; NOW leads Value by 13 points; NOW leads Quality by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, NOW or PANW?
Analyst price targets imply +4.3% upside for NOW and +4% for PANW. 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, NOW or PANW?
NOW is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. NOW on the peer-relative Value factor, by 13 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, NOW or PANW?
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, NOW or PANW?
NOW on the Momentum factor, by 65 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, NOW or PANW?
NOW is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. NOW 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 NOW more profitable than PANW?
NOW leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 74.8% vs 70.4%; operating margin 11.4% vs 6%; ttm roe 13.8% vs 1.7%.
Is NOW's lead over PANW getting stronger or weaker?
NOW lead: Reversed — PANW led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; NOW now leads by 21. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 7 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-19, when NOW moved ahead of PANW.
What would change the NOW vs PANW verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: PANW closes the Momentum gap — currently 65 points behind, the largest single contributor to NOW's edge; PANW's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; NOW's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 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 NOW and PANW?
NOW: 4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. PANW: 2 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 NOW is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On PANW it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare NOW and PANW 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.