OBDC vs TPVG Stock Comparison
Compare OBDC and TPVG across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between OBDC and TPVG?
OBDC and TPVG are close on the current AIQ evidence, so the better fit depends more on objective, risk tolerance and valuation preference than on a single headline score.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Blue Owl Capital Corporation vs TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp.
OBDC and TPVG are effectively level
OBDC and TPVG are effectively level on the AIQ Score; the factor table below shows where each one holds its advantage.
Blue Owl Capital Corporation
TriplePoint Venture Growth BDC Corp.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score does not currently separate OBDC and TPVG as of Sep 6, 2026. Both names are scored on the same 0–100 scale across Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience, and the factor table below shows where each one holds its advantage.
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
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 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.
- Value30%54 vs 64TPVG +10
- Momentum25%51 vs 41OBDC +10
- Risk Resilience15%52 vs 43OBDC +9
- Quality30%51 vs 52Even
Neither name separates cleanly on the covered dimensions.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-05, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-04.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — OBDC and TPVG 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
EvenNeither separates on the overall score.
Growth
TPVGTPVG on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
TPVGTPVG on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 points.
Momentum
OBDCOBDC on the Momentum factor, by 10 points.
Lower downside
OBDCOBDC on Risk Resilience, by 9 points.
Analyst upside
OBDCOBDC on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | OBDC | TPVG | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +14% | -4.4% | 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 |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
How each independent group of evidence reads the pair.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 52 vs 52 |
| 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 54 vs 64 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day 2.3% vs 5.1%; vs 200-day -1.7% vs -5.5% |
| Risk Resilience | OBDC | Risk Resilience 52 vs 43 |
| Analyst expectations | OBDC | Target upside 14% vs -4.4% |
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 0 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)
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 24 – Sep 5TPVG lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 0 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- Level
- 52 vs 52
- 7 sessions ago
- TPVG +7
- 51 vs 58
- 30 sessions ago
- TPVG +1
- 57 vs 58
- 90 sessions ago
- TPVG +1
- 46 vs 47
The lead changed hands 11 times in this window, most recently on Aug 6 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 / 2 bearish
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (4.07%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
0 bullish / 2 bearish
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (11.18%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
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 +0.18%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -2.43%, AIQ 0 points).
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) | 0.9% | -3.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -2.1% | 0.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 3.4% | -2.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -0.6% | -0.8% |
| Year to date | -8.3% | -20% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -19.8% | -22.9% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | OBDC | TPVG |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 44.9 | 32.9 |
| ADX (14) | 18.8 | 32.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 2.3% | 5.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -1.7% | -5.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 16.8% | 21.7% |
Risk
OBDC is the more resilient| Metric | OBDC | TPVG |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.8 | 0.75 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.99 | -0.68 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.54 | -1.18 |
| Max drawdown | -25.6% | -35.3% |
| Current drawdown | -20.6% | -23.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 24.4% | 35.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.5% | -3.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which has more analyst upside, OBDC or TPVG?
Analyst price targets imply +14% upside for OBDC and -4.4% for TPVG, so the Street currently favors OBDC. 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?
OBDC on the Momentum factor, by 10 points. Momentum carries 25% of 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 9 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of 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%.
What do the current signals say about OBDC and TPVG?
OBDC: 0 bullish / 2 bearish. TPVG: 0 bullish / 2 bearish. 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
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.