PANW vs NET Stock Comparison
PANW currently leads NET in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 36 vs 25. The clearest difference is quality.
What is the main difference between PANW and NET?
PANW leads the current stock comparison as Palo Alto Networks, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Palo Alto Networks, Inc. vs Cloudflare, Inc.
PANW leads
PANW leads by 11 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience.
Competitive: 5 of 6 evidence groups support PANW, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Palo Alto Networks, Inc.
Cloudflare, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors PANW over NET, 36 versus 25 as of Oct 21, 2026. PANW's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience. PANW also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PANW today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. PANW lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 11 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Palo Alto Networks, Inc. and Cloudflare, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price return from daily closes; distributions are not included.
Price return comparison
Growth of $10,000, price only
Split-adjusted closes only. Distributions are excluded, which understates the return of any fund or stock that pays them.
Compare PANW and NET 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.
- Quality60 vs 30PANW +30
- Risk Resilience44 vs 32PANW +12
- Momentum16 vs 15Even
- Value24 vs 24Even
5 of 6 evidence groups favor PANW. PANW’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience.
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 -5
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.
PANW's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — PANW and NET 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
PANWPANW on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
NETNET on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
PANWPANW on Risk Resilience, by 12 points.
Analyst upside
PANWPANW 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 | PANW | NET | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +4% | +0.1% | PANW has more room |
| Target dispersion | +85.6% | +95.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 37 | 21 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PANW. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | PANW | 36 vs 25 |
| Fundamentals | PANWon balance | revenue growth 15.7% vs 8.8%; EPS growth -147.5% vs -6.4%; TTM ROE 1.7% vs -13.9%; gross margin 70.4% vs 72.6%; operating margin 6% vs -14.1% — PANW takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 24 vs 24 |
| Technicals | PANW | Price vs 50-day -6.7% vs -3.8%; vs 200-day 29.7% vs 19.9% |
| Risk Resilience | PANW | Risk Resilience 44 vs 32 |
| Analyst expectations | PANW | Target upside 4% vs 0.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of PANW and NET 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 moderate at 11 points.
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (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)
- 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 PANW.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20PANW lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 11 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- PANW +11
- 36 vs 25
- 7 sessions ago
- PANW +15
- 40 vs 25
- 30 sessions ago
- PANW +11
- 54 vs 43
- 90 sessions ago
- PANW +14
- 55 vs 41
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 / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
No signal that the other name lacks.
3 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only NET
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 5 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode, BB Lower Band Breach, Keltner Channel Breakdown, MACD Bearish Crossover.
PANW 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.
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +2.05%, AIQ -1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +5.32%, 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.
- 1NET closes the Quality gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to PANW's edge.
- 2NET's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3PANW's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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
PANW leads on balance| Metric | PANW | NET |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 15.7% | 8.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -147.5% | -6.4% |
| Gross margin | 70.4% | 72.6% |
| Operating margin | 6% | -14.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 1.7% | -13.9% |
| Debt to equity | 0.09 | 2.18 |
Performance
PANW leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | PANW | NET |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -14.1% | -16.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -9.2% | -17.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 1.5% | 8.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 94.5% | 40.5% |
| Year to date | 84.7% | 48% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 65.6% | 38% |
Technicals
PANW has the stronger structure| Metric | PANW | NET |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 31.6 | 27.7 |
| ADX (14) | 19.8 | 23 |
| Price vs 50-day | -6.7% | -3.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | 29.7% | 19.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 55.5% | 45.7% |
Risk
PANW is the more resilient| Metric | PANW | NET |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.29 | 1.65 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.17 | 0.78 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.91 | 1.08 |
| Max drawdown | -36% | -36.8% |
| Current drawdown | -19% | -19.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 49.1% | 65.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.7% | -6.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, PANW or NET?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, PANW is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 36 against NET's 25. 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 PANW or NET the better buy right now?
PANW carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 5 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 PANW over NET?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. PANW leads Quality by 30 points; PANW leads Risk Resilience by 12 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, PANW or NET?
Analyst price targets imply +4% upside for PANW and +0.1% for NET, so the Street currently favors PANW. The model and the Street agree here, which is a broader base of evidence than either alone. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, PANW or NET?
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, PANW or NET?
NET 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, PANW or NET?
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, PANW or NET?
PANW is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. PANW on Risk Resilience, by 12 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 PANW more profitable than NET?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 70.4% vs 72.6%; operating margin 6% vs -14.1%; ttm roe 1.7% vs -13.9%. PANW leads on two measures and NET on one measure, and there is no single profitability composite that resolves the split — which of the two reads as "more profitable" depends on whether you weight pricing power or operating leverage.
Is PANW's lead over NET getting stronger or weaker?
PANW lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 11 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the PANW vs NET verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: NET closes the Quality gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to PANW's edge; NET's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; PANW's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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 PANW and NET?
PANW: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. NET: 3 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 PANW is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On NET it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare PANW and NET 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.