PANW vs SAP Stock Comparison
SAP currently leads PANW in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 68 vs 48. The clearest difference is value.
What is the main difference between PANW and SAP?
SAP leads the current stock comparison as SAP SE, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Palo Alto Networks, Inc. vs SAP SE
SAP leads
SAP leads by 20 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Risk Resilience, and the lead has widened from 11 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 5 of 6 evidence groups support SAP, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Palo Alto Networks, Inc.
SAP SE
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SAP over PANW, 68 versus 48 as of Oct 31, 2026. SAP's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and risk resilience. SAP also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SAP today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the lead has swung materially session to session. SAP lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 11 to 20 points over 30 sessions. SAP 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 Palo Alto Networks, Inc. and SAP SE 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 PANW and SAP 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.
- Value24 vs 50SAP +26
- Risk Resilience45 vs 66SAP +21
- Momentum66 vs 83SAP +17
- Quality60 vs 74SAP +14
5 of 6 evidence groups favor SAP. SAP’s edge is concentrated in value and risk resilience.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum +4
New signals
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.
SAP'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 SAP both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
SAP (SAP SE): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and risk resilience.
PANW (Palo Alto Networks, Inc.): the counter-case, on technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 57.2% against 18%.
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
SAPSAP on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
SAPSAP on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
SAPSAP on the peer-relative Value factor, by 26 points.
Momentum
SAPSAP on the Momentum factor, by 17 points.
Lower downside
SAPSAP on Risk Resilience, by 21 points.
Analyst upside
SAPSAP 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 | SAP | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -1.3% | +28.9% | SAP has more room |
| Target dispersion | +85.6% | +205.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 37 | 6 | 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 SAP. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | SAP | 48 vs 68 |
| Fundamentals | SAPon balance | revenue growth 15.7% vs 3.4%; EPS growth -147.5% vs 2.6%; TTM ROE 1.7% vs 17.8%; gross margin 70.4% vs 72.8%; operating margin 6% vs 27.4% — SAP takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | SAP | Value 24 vs 50 |
| Technicals | PANW | Price vs 50-day -1.5% vs 8.2%; vs 200-day 47.2% vs 23.6% |
| Risk Resilience | SAP | Risk Resilience 45 vs 66 |
| Analyst expectations | SAP | Target upside -1.3% vs 28.9% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of PANW and SAP 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 20 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (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 SAP.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28SAP lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 11 to 20 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- SAP +20
- 48 vs 68
- 7 sessions ago
- SAP +30
- 42 vs 72
- 30 sessions ago
- SAP +11
- 52 vs 63
- 90 sessions ago
- SAP +28
- 40 vs 68
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Jul 2 when SAP moved ahead of PANW.
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.
4 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only PANW
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.59%)
5 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only SAP
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 4 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish, Uptrend Structure Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
SAP 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 down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -3.86%, AIQ +1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.41%, 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.
- 1PANW closes the Value gap — currently 26 points behind, the largest single contributor to SAP's edge.
- 2PANW's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed.
- 3SAP's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 5 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
SAP leads on balance| Metric | PANW | SAP |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 15.7% | 3.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -147.5% | 2.6% |
| Gross margin | 70.4% | 72.8% |
| Operating margin | 6% | 27.4% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 1.7% | 17.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.09 | 0.23 |
Performance
PANW leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | PANW | SAP |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 13.6% | 1.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.7% | 13.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 21.1% | 31% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 117.3% | 37.8% |
| Year to date | 114.2% | -2.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 81.7% | -12.9% |
Technicals
PANW has the stronger structure| Metric | PANW | SAP |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 48.9 | 83.7 |
| ADX (14) | 17.4 | 32 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1.5% | 8.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 47.2% | 23.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 57.2% | 18% |
Risk
SAP is the more resilient| Metric | PANW | SAP |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.24 | 0.62 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.33 | -0.25 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.2 | -0.33 |
| Max drawdown | -36% | -45.8% |
| Current drawdown | -6% | -12.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 49.8% | 38.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.7% | -3.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, PANW or SAP?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, SAP is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 68 against PANW's 48. The edge comes from value 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 SAP the better buy right now?
SAP carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 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 SAP over PANW?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. SAP leads Value by 26 points; SAP leads Risk Resilience by 21 points; SAP leads Momentum by 17 points. SAP leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so the sweep is not explained by PANW 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, PANW or SAP?
Analyst price targets imply -1.3% upside for PANW and +28.9% for SAP, so the Street currently favors SAP. 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 SAP?
SAP is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. SAP on the peer-relative Value factor, by 26 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, PANW or SAP?
SAP 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 SAP?
SAP on the Momentum factor, by 17 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, PANW or SAP?
SAP is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SAP on Risk Resilience, by 21 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 SAP?
SAP leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 70.4% vs 72.8%; operating margin 6% vs 27.4%; ttm roe 1.7% vs 17.8%.
Is SAP's lead over PANW getting stronger or weaker?
SAP lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 11 to 20 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-07-02, when SAP moved ahead of PANW.
What would change the PANW vs SAP verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: PANW closes the Value gap — currently 26 points behind, the largest single contributor to SAP's edge; PANW's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed; SAP's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 5 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 PANW and SAP?
PANW: 4 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. SAP: 5 bullish / 1 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 PANW is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On SAP it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare PANW and SAP 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.