OPEN vs PAYO Stock Comparison
Compare OPEN and PAYO across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between OPEN and PAYO?
PAYO leads the current stock comparison as Payoneer Global Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Opendoor Technologies Inc. vs Payoneer Global Inc.
PAYO leads
PAYO leads by 22 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 15 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors OPEN on target upside.
Stable: 4 of 6 evidence groups support PAYO, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Opendoor Technologies Inc.
Payoneer Global Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors PAYO over OPEN, 63 versus 41 as of Sep 11, 2026. PAYO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and momentum, while OPEN holds the stronger value profile. PAYO also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors OPEN. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PAYO today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. PAYO lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 22 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Opendoor Technologies Inc. and Payoneer Global 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 OPEN and PAYO 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.
- Risk Resilience39 vs 83PAYO +44
- Momentum25 vs 67PAYO +42
- Quality31 vs 65PAYO +34
- Value65 vs 48OPEN +17
4 of 6 evidence groups favor PAYO. PAYO’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and momentum; 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.
No factor moved materially.
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +17
New signals
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
PAYO's lead widened by 4 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — OPEN and PAYO both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
PAYO (Payoneer Global Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and momentum.
OPEN (Opendoor Technologies Inc.): the counter-case, on value, valuation, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 57.6% against 4.7%.
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
PAYOPAYO on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
OPENOPEN on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
OPENOPEN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 17 points.
Momentum
PAYOPAYO on the Momentum factor, by 42 points.
Lower downside
PAYOPAYO on Risk Resilience, by 44 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 PAYO, analyst targets favor OPEN. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | OPEN | PAYO | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +112.2% | +11.4% | OPEN has more room |
| Target dispersion | +63.3% | +20.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PAYO. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | PAYO | 41 vs 63 |
| Fundamentals | PAYOon balance | revenue growth 22.6% vs 4.8%; EPS growth 5.6% vs -112.7%; TTM ROE -165.1% vs 7.3%; gross margin 8.3% vs 78%; operating margin -16% vs 10.6% — PAYO takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | OPEN | Value 65 vs 48 |
| Technicals | PAYO | Price vs 50-day -27.8% vs 0%; vs 200-day -40.8% vs 21.5% |
| Risk Resilience | PAYO | Risk Resilience 39 vs 83 |
| Analyst expectations | OPEN | Target upside 112.2% vs 11.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of OPEN and PAYO and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 22 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 PAYO.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10PAYO lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 22 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- PAYO +22
- 41 vs 63
- 7 sessions ago
- PAYO +22
- 42 vs 64
- 30 sessions ago
- PAYO +15
- 44 vs 59
- 90 sessions ago
- PAYO +11
- 49 vs 60
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
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.
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
4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (21.45%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (0.8%)
PAYO 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 -0.36%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price 0%, AIQ +4 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 Risk Resilience gap — currently 44 points behind, the largest single contributor to PAYO's edge.
- 2OPEN's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3PAYO'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
PAYO leads on balance| Metric | OPEN | PAYO |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 22.6% | 4.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 5.6% | -112.7% |
| Gross margin | 8.3% | 78% |
| Operating margin | -16% | 10.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -165.1% | 7.3% |
| Debt to equity | 0.21 | 0.13 |
Performance
PAYO leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | OPEN | PAYO |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -9.4% | 0% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -19.8% | 0% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -37.5% | 6.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -46.9% | 53.8% |
| Year to date | -47.3% | 26.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -52.1% | 5.3% |
Technicals
PAYO has the stronger structure| Metric | OPEN | PAYO |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 25.2 | 56.5 |
| ADX (14) | 31.4 | 17.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -27.8% | 0% |
| Price vs 200-day | -40.8% | 21.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 57.6% | 4.7% |
Risk
PAYO is the more resilient| Metric | OPEN | PAYO |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 3.26 | 1.03 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.17 | 0.25 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.4 | 0.33 |
| Max drawdown | -72.5% | -37.3% |
| Current drawdown | -72.5% | -0.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 118.3% | 47.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -8.7% | -3.9% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, OPEN or PAYO?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, PAYO is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 63 against OPEN's 41. The edge comes from risk resilience and momentum. 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 OPEN or PAYO the better buy right now?
PAYO carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Stable rating means the gap is wide and the evidence is broad, so the conclusion is unlikely to turn on a single session.
Why does the AIQ Score favor PAYO over OPEN?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. PAYO leads Risk Resilience by 44 points; PAYO leads Momentum by 42 points; PAYO leads Quality by 34 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, OPEN or PAYO?
Analyst price targets imply +112.2% upside for OPEN and +11.4% for PAYO, so the Street currently favors OPEN. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors PAYO. 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, OPEN or PAYO?
OPEN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. OPEN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 17 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, OPEN or PAYO?
OPEN 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, OPEN or PAYO?
PAYO on the Momentum factor, by 42 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, OPEN or PAYO?
PAYO is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. PAYO on Risk Resilience, by 44 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 OPEN more profitable than PAYO?
PAYO leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 8.3% vs 78%; operating margin -16% vs 10.6%; ttm roe -165.1% vs 7.3%.
Is PAYO's lead over OPEN getting stronger or weaker?
PAYO lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 22 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the OPEN vs PAYO verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: OPEN closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 44 points behind, the largest single contributor to PAYO's edge; OPEN's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; PAYO'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 OPEN and PAYO?
OPEN: 2 bullish / 5 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. PAYO: 4 bullish / 1 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 OPEN is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On PAYO it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare OPEN and PAYO 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.