OPEN vs PYPL Stock Comparison
Compare OPEN and PYPL across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between OPEN and PYPL?
PYPL leads the current stock comparison as PayPal Holdings, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Opendoor Technologies Inc. vs PayPal Holdings, Inc.
PYPL leads
PYPL leads by 12 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience, but the lead has narrowed from 22 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors OPEN on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support PYPL, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Opendoor Technologies Inc.
PayPal Holdings, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors PYPL over OPEN, 53 versus 41 as of Sep 11, 2026. PYPL's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience. PYPL 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 PYPL today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. PYPL lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 22 to 12 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Opendoor Technologies Inc. and PayPal Holdings, 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 PYPL 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.
- Quality31 vs 64PYPL +33
- Risk Resilience39 vs 46PYPL +7
- Momentum25 vs 29PYPL +4
- Value65 vs 64Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor PYPL. PYPL’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience.
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 +1
No new signals fired.
PYPL's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — OPEN and PYPL both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
PYPL (PayPal Holdings, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
OPEN (Opendoor Technologies Inc.): the counter-case, on 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
PYPLPYPL on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
OPENOPEN on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
PYPLPYPL on the Momentum factor, by 4 points.
Lower downside
PYPLPYPL on Risk Resilience, by 7 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 PYPL, analyst targets favor OPEN. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | OPEN | PYPL | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +112.2% | -0.1% | OPEN has more room |
| Target dispersion | +63.3% | +52.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 17 | 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 PYPL. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | PYPL | 41 vs 53 |
| Fundamentals | PYPLon balance | revenue growth 22.6% vs 3.9%; EPS growth 5.6% vs 3.3%; TTM ROE -165.1% vs 24.4%; gross margin 8.3% vs 45.8%; operating margin -16% vs 18.8% — PYPL takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 65 vs 64 |
| Technicals | PYPL | Price vs 50-day -27.8% vs -3.3%; vs 200-day -40.8% vs 4.7% |
| Risk Resilience | PYPL | Risk Resilience 39 vs 46 |
| Analyst expectations | OPEN | Target upside 112.2% vs -0.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of OPEN and PYPL 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 12 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 PYPL.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10PYPL lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 22 to 12 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- PYPL +12
- 41 vs 53
- 7 sessions ago
- PYPL +12
- 42 vs 54
- 30 sessions ago
- PYPL +22
- 44 vs 66
- 90 sessions ago
- PYPL +14
- 49 vs 63
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
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (9.11%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
PYPL 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).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.77%, 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.
- 1OPEN closes the Quality gap — currently 33 points behind, the largest single contributor to PYPL's edge.
- 2OPEN's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3PYPL's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 10 points over 30 sessions, and a further 12-point move would eliminate PYPL'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
PYPL leads on balance| Metric | OPEN | PYPL |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 22.6% | 3.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 5.6% | 3.3% |
| Gross margin | 8.3% | 45.8% |
| Operating margin | -16% | 18.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -165.1% | 24.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.21 | 0.72 |
Performance
PYPL leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | OPEN | PYPL |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -9.4% | -2.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -19.8% | -9.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -37.5% | 31% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -46.9% | 17% |
| Year to date | -47.3% | -8.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -52.1% | -22.1% |
Technicals
PYPL has the stronger structure| Metric | OPEN | PYPL |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 25.2 | 29.1 |
| ADX (14) | 31.4 | 35.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | -27.8% | -3.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | -40.8% | 4.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 57.6% | 57% |
Risk
PYPL is the more resilient| Metric | OPEN | PYPL |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 3.26 | 1.14 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.17 | -0.4 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.4 | -0.48 |
| Max drawdown | -72.5% | -48.7% |
| Current drawdown | -72.5% | -30% |
| Annualized volatility | 118.3% | 44.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -8.7% | -3.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, OPEN or PYPL?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, PYPL is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 53 against OPEN's 41. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. 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 PYPL the better buy right now?
PYPL carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 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 PYPL over OPEN?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. PYPL leads Quality by 33 points; PYPL leads Risk Resilience by 7 points; PYPL leads Momentum by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, OPEN or PYPL?
Analyst price targets imply +112.2% upside for OPEN and -0.1% for PYPL, so the Street currently favors OPEN. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors PYPL. 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 PYPL?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. 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 PYPL?
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 PYPL?
PYPL on the Momentum factor, by 4 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 PYPL?
PYPL is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. PYPL 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 OPEN more profitable than PYPL?
PYPL leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 8.3% vs 45.8%; operating margin -16% vs 18.8%; ttm roe -165.1% vs 24.4%.
Is PYPL's lead over OPEN getting stronger or weaker?
PYPL lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 22 to 12 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 PYPL verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: OPEN closes the Quality gap — currently 33 points behind, the largest single contributor to PYPL's edge; OPEN's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; PYPL's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 10 points over 30 sessions, and a further 12-point move would eliminate PYPL's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about OPEN and PYPL?
OPEN: 2 bullish / 5 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. PYPL: 2 bullish / 2 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 PYPL it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare OPEN and PYPL 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.