OBDC vs TPVG Stock Comparison
TPVG currently leads OBDC in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 47 vs 45. The clearest difference is value, while OBDC has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between OBDC and TPVG?
TPVG leads the current stock comparison as TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Blue Owl Capital Corporation vs TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp.
TPVG leads
TPVG leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Value. Wall Street currently favors OBDC on target upside.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support TPVG, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Blue Owl Capital Corporation
TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TPVG over OBDC, 47 versus 45 as of Oct 21, 2026. TPVG's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value, while OBDC holds the stronger risk resilience profile. TPVG also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors OBDC. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TPVG today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. TPVG lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Blue Owl Capital Corporation and TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp. 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 OBDC and TPVG 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.
- Value53 vs 63TPVG +10
- Risk Resilience50 vs 40OBDC +10
- Quality51 vs 52Even
- Momentum26 vs 25Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor TPVG. TPVG’s edge is concentrated in value; OBDC keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
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.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.
TPVG's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — OBDC and TPVG both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TPVG (TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value.
OBDC (Blue Owl Capital Corporation): the counter-case, on risk resilience, technicals, 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
TPVGTPVG on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
TPVGTPVG on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
TPVGTPVG on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
OBDCOBDC on Risk Resilience, by 10 points.
Analyst upside
OBDCOBDC on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors TPVG, analyst targets favor OBDC. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | OBDC | TPVG | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +31.6% | +18.2% | OBDC has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 2 | 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
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TPVG. 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 | 45 vs 47 |
| Fundamentals | TPVGon balance | revenue growth 28.7% vs 8.9%; EPS growth 3.6% vs 73.3%; TTM ROE 4% vs 11%; gross margin 67.6% vs 76%; operating margin 48.7% vs 65.6% — TPVG takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | TPVG | Value 53 vs 63 |
| Technicals | OBDC | Price vs 50-day -9.6% vs -15.8%; vs 200-day -11.8% vs -18.8% |
| Risk Resilience | OBDC | Risk Resilience 50 vs 40 |
| Analyst expectations | OBDC | Target upside 31.6% vs 18.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of OBDC and TPVG 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 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 TPVG.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20TPVG lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TPVG +2
- 45 vs 47
- 7 sessions ago
- TPVG +1
- 46 vs 47
- 30 sessions ago
- TPVG +2
- 46 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- TPVG +4
- 54 vs 58
The lead changed hands 8 times in this window, most recently on Sep 21 when TPVG moved ahead of OBDC.
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.
0 bullish / 4 bearish / 1 neutral
Only OBDC
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
1 bullish / 5 bearish, conflicted
Only TPVG
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 4 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, 52-Week Low Proximity, Downtrend Structure Active, MACD Bearish Crossover.
TPVG 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 -0.4%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.4%, 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.
- 1OBDC closes the Value gap — currently 10 points behind, the largest single contributor to TPVG's edge.
- 2OBDC's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3TPVG's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 5 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
TPVG leads on balance| Metric | OBDC | TPVG |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 28.7% | 8.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 3.6% | 73.3% |
| Gross margin | 67.6% | 76% |
| Operating margin | 48.7% | 65.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 4% | 11% |
| Debt to equity | 0.87 | 1.26 |
Performance
OBDC leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | OBDC | TPVG |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.5% | -4.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -11% | -12.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -8.2% | -6.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -13.8% | -20% |
| Year to date | -19.4% | -32.4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -20.9% | -22.1% |
Technicals
OBDC has the stronger structure| Metric | OBDC | TPVG |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 31.1 | 18 |
| ADX (14) | 24.8 | 20.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -9.6% | -15.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | -11.8% | -18.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 20.6% | 23.8% |
Risk
OBDC is the more resilient| Metric | OBDC | TPVG |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.82 | 0.74 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.05 | -0.68 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.66 | -1.13 |
| Max drawdown | -26.6% | -36.8% |
| Current drawdown | -26.4% | -36.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 23.9% | 35.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.5% | -3.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, OBDC or TPVG?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TPVG is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 47 against OBDC's 45. The edge comes from value. OBDC 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 OBDC or TPVG the better buy right now?
TPVG carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 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 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor TPVG over OBDC?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. TPVG leads Value by 10 points; OBDC leads Risk Resilience by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, OBDC or TPVG?
Analyst price targets imply +31.6% upside for OBDC and +18.2% for TPVG, so the Street currently favors OBDC. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors TPVG. 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, OBDC or TPVG?
TPVG is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. TPVG on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 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, OBDC or TPVG?
TPVG 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, OBDC or TPVG?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, OBDC or TPVG?
OBDC is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. OBDC on Risk Resilience, by 10 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 OBDC more profitable than TPVG?
TPVG leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 67.6% vs 76%; operating margin 48.7% vs 65.6%; ttm roe 4% vs 11%.
Is TPVG's lead over OBDC getting stronger or weaker?
TPVG lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 8 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-21, when TPVG moved ahead of OBDC.
What would change the OBDC vs TPVG verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: OBDC closes the Value gap — currently 10 points behind, the largest single contributor to TPVG's edge; OBDC's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; TPVG's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 5 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 OBDC and TPVG?
OBDC: 0 bullish / 4 bearish / 1 neutral. TPVG: 1 bullish / 5 bearish, 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 OBDC is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On TPVG it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare OBDC and TPVG 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.