NU vs OPEN Stock Comparison
Compare NU and OPEN across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between NU and OPEN?
NU leads the current stock comparison as Nu Holdings Ltd., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Nu Holdings Ltd. vs Opendoor Technologies Inc.
NU leads
NU leads by 7 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 10 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors OPEN on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support NU, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Nu Holdings Ltd.
Opendoor Technologies Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors NU over OPEN, 48 versus 41 as of Sep 11, 2026. NU's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and quality, while OPEN holds the stronger value profile. NU also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors OPEN. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor NU today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. NU lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 7 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Nu Holdings Ltd. and Opendoor Technologies 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 NU and OPEN 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 25NU +45
- Value35 vs 65OPEN +30
- Quality50 vs 31NU +19
- Risk Resilience35 vs 39OPEN +4
3 of 6 evidence groups favor NU. NU’s edge is concentrated in momentum and quality; OPEN keeps a meaningful value 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.
No factor moved materially.
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
NU's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — NU and OPEN both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
NU (Nu Holdings Ltd.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and quality.
OPEN (Opendoor Technologies Inc.): the counter-case, on value, risk resilience, valuation — but at materially higher volatility, 57.6% against 52.5%.
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
NUNU on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
NUNU on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
OPENOPEN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 30 points.
Momentum
NUNU on the Momentum factor, by 45 points.
Lower downside
OPENOPEN on Risk Resilience, by 4 points.
Analyst upside
OPENOPEN on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors NU, analyst targets favor OPEN. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | NU | OPEN | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +11.5% | +112.2% | OPEN has more room |
| Target dispersion | +36.8% | +63.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 5 | 3 | 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 NU. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | NU | 48 vs 41 |
| Fundamentals | NUon balance | revenue growth 10.8% vs 22.6%; EPS growth 22.2% vs 5.6%; TTM ROE 30.3% vs -165.1%; gross margin 44% vs 8.3%; operating margin 22.6% vs -16% — NU takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | OPEN | Value 35 vs 65 |
| Technicals | NU | Price vs 50-day 2% vs -27.8%; vs 200-day 0.4% vs -40.8% |
| Risk Resilience | OPEN | Risk Resilience 35 vs 39 |
| Analyst expectations | OPEN | Target upside 11.5% vs 112.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of NU and OPEN 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 7 points.
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (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 NU.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10NU lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 7 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- NU +7
- 48 vs 41
- 7 sessions ago
- NU +6
- 48 vs 42
- 30 sessions ago
- NU +10
- 54 vs 44
- 90 sessions ago
- NU +10
- 59 vs 49
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Jun 5 when NU moved ahead of OPEN.
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 / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (4.42%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.94%)
2 bullish / 5 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (29.64%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
NU 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 -2.66%, AIQ +1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.36%, 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.
- 1OPEN closes the Momentum gap — currently 45 points behind, the largest single contributor to NU's edge.
- 2OPEN's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3NU's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 7-point move would eliminate NU'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
NU leads on balance| Metric | NU | OPEN |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 10.8% | 22.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 22.2% | 5.6% |
| Gross margin | 44% | 8.3% |
| Operating margin | 22.6% | -16% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 30.3% | -165.1% |
| Debt to equity | 3.17 | 0.21 |
Performance
NU leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | NU | OPEN |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.5% | -9.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 10.8% | -19.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 29.3% | -37.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 3.7% | -46.9% |
| Year to date | -10.3% | -47.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -1.3% | -52.1% |
Technicals
NU has the stronger structure| Metric | NU | OPEN |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 59.9 | 25.2 |
| ADX (14) | 22.4 | 31.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | 2% | -27.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | 0.4% | -40.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 52.5% | 57.6% |
Risk
OPEN is the more resilient| Metric | NU | OPEN |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.43 | 3.26 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.01 | -0.17 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.02 | -0.4 |
| Max drawdown | -38.2% | -72.5% |
| Current drawdown | -19.9% | -72.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 38.1% | 118.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.4% | -8.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, NU or OPEN?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, NU is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 48 against OPEN's 41. The edge comes from momentum and quality. OPEN is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 NU or OPEN the better buy right now?
NU 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 NU over OPEN?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. NU leads Momentum by 45 points; OPEN leads Value by 30 points; NU leads Quality by 19 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, NU or OPEN?
Analyst price targets imply +11.5% upside for NU and +112.2% for OPEN, so the Street currently favors OPEN. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors NU. 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, NU or OPEN?
OPEN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. OPEN 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, NU or OPEN?
NU 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, NU or OPEN?
NU on the Momentum factor, by 45 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, NU or OPEN?
OPEN is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. OPEN on Risk Resilience, by 4 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 NU more profitable than OPEN?
NU leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 44% vs 8.3%; operating margin 22.6% vs -16%; ttm roe 30.3% vs -165.1%.
Is NU's lead over OPEN getting stronger or weaker?
NU lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 7 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 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-06-05, when NU moved ahead of OPEN.
What would change the NU vs OPEN verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: OPEN closes the Momentum gap — currently 45 points behind, the largest single contributor to NU's edge; OPEN's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; NU's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 7-point move would eliminate NU's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about NU and OPEN?
NU: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. OPEN: 2 bullish / 5 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 NU is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On OPEN it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare NU and OPEN 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.