OKTA vs PAYC Stock Comparison
PAYC currently leads OKTA in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 71 vs 45. The clearest difference is momentum.
What is the main difference between OKTA and PAYC?
PAYC leads the current stock comparison as Paycom Software, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Okta, Inc. vs Paycom Software, Inc.
PAYC leads
PAYC leads by 26 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, and the lead has widened from 7 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors OKTA on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support PAYC, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Okta, Inc.
Paycom Software, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors PAYC over OKTA, 71 versus 45 as of Oct 21, 2026. PAYC's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value. PAYC also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors OKTA. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PAYC today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the lead has swung materially session to session. PAYC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 7 to 26 points over 30 sessions. PAYC leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so a sweep is not explained by valuation alone — it deserves additional scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, expectations or event risk.
Compare Okta, Inc. and Paycom Software, Inc. 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 OKTA and PAYC 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.
- Momentum37 vs 89PAYC +52
- Value33 vs 61PAYC +28
- Quality64 vs 74PAYC +10
- Risk Resilience47 vs 54PAYC +7
4 of 6 evidence groups favor PAYC. PAYC’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.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +2
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 8 active signals are unchanged.
PAYC's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — OKTA and PAYC both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
PAYC (Paycom Software, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
OKTA (Okta, Inc.): the counter-case, on analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 60.2% against 33.7%.
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
PAYCPAYC on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
OKTAOKTA on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
PAYCPAYC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 28 points.
Momentum
PAYCPAYC on the Momentum factor, by 52 points.
Lower downside
PAYCPAYC on Risk Resilience, by 7 points.
Analyst upside
OKTAOKTA on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors PAYC, analyst targets favor OKTA. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | OKTA | PAYC | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -15% | -23.3% | OKTA has more room |
| Target dispersion | +104.3% | +74.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 33 | 12 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PAYC. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | PAYC | 45 vs 71 |
| Fundamentals | PAYCon balance | revenue growth 5.2% vs -7.1%; EPS growth 59.5% vs -23.3%; TTM ROE 4.3% vs 40.4%; gross margin 78.1% vs 80.1%; operating margin 7.7% vs 30.3% — PAYC takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | PAYC | Value 33 vs 61 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day 14.9% vs 14.4%; vs 200-day 62.2% vs 61.7% |
| Risk Resilience | PAYC | Risk Resilience 47 vs 54 |
| Analyst expectations | OKTA | Target upside -15% vs -23.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of OKTA and PAYC and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 26 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 PAYC.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20PAYC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 7 to 26 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- PAYC +26
- 45 vs 71
- 7 sessions ago
- PAYC +18
- 52 vs 70
- 30 sessions ago
- PAYC +7
- 57 vs 64
- 90 sessions ago
- PAYC +16
- 54 vs 70
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Jul 1 when PAYC moved ahead of OKTA.
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.
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only OKTA
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (5.62%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
6 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
Only PAYC
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (0.0%)
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish, Uptrend Structure Active.
PAYC 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 +7.54%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.5%, 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.
- 1OKTA closes the Momentum gap — currently 52 points behind, the largest single contributor to PAYC's edge.
- 2OKTA generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3PAYC's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 6 bullish and 2 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
PAYC leads on balance| Metric | OKTA | PAYC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 5.2% | -7.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 59.5% | -23.3% |
| Gross margin | 78.1% | 80.1% |
| Operating margin | 7.7% | 30.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 4.3% | 40.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.01 | 1.72 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | OKTA | PAYC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -14.4% | 10.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -1.3% | 16.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 41.9% | 82% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 149.9% | 101.1% |
| Year to date | 124.4% | 57.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 121.2% | 28.5% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | OKTA | PAYC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 40.4 | 83.4 |
| ADX (14) | 37 | 36.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | 14.9% | 14.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | 62.2% | 61.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 60.2% | 33.7% |
Risk
PAYC is the more resilient| Metric | OKTA | PAYC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.32 | 0.09 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.45 | 0.71 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.74 | 1.23 |
| Max drawdown | -33.1% | -45.1% |
| Current drawdown | -16.4% | 0% |
| Annualized volatility | 67.3% | 47.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.4% | -4.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, OKTA or PAYC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, PAYC is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 71 against OKTA's 45. 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 OKTA or PAYC the better buy right now?
PAYC carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor PAYC over OKTA?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. PAYC leads Momentum by 52 points; PAYC leads Value by 28 points; PAYC leads Quality by 10 points. PAYC leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so the sweep is not explained by OKTA simply being cheaper — it warrants extra scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, forward expectations or event risk the factors do not capture.
Which has more analyst upside, OKTA or PAYC?
Analyst price targets imply -15% upside for OKTA and -23.3% for PAYC, so the Street currently favors OKTA. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors PAYC. 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, OKTA or PAYC?
PAYC is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. PAYC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 28 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, OKTA or PAYC?
OKTA 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, OKTA or PAYC?
PAYC on the Momentum factor, by 52 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, OKTA or PAYC?
PAYC is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. PAYC on Risk Resilience, by 7 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 OKTA more profitable than PAYC?
PAYC leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 78.1% vs 80.1%; operating margin 7.7% vs 30.3%; ttm roe 4.3% vs 40.4%.
Is PAYC's lead over OKTA getting stronger or weaker?
PAYC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 7 to 26 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 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-01, when PAYC moved ahead of OKTA.
What would change the OKTA vs PAYC verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: OKTA closes the Momentum gap — currently 52 points behind, the largest single contributor to PAYC's edge; OKTA generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover; PAYC's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 6 bullish and 2 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 OKTA and PAYC?
OKTA: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. PAYC: 6 bullish / 2 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 OKTA is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On PAYC it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare OKTA and PAYC 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.