PAGS vs PBR Stock Comparison
PBR currently leads PAGS in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 58 vs 45. The clearest difference is quality, while PAGS has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between PAGS and PBR?
PBR leads the current stock comparison as Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. - Petrobras, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
PagSeguro Digital Ltd. vs Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. - Petrobras
PBR leads
PBR leads by 13 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 10 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors PAGS on target upside.
Competitive: 3 of 6 evidence groups support PBR, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
PagSeguro Digital Ltd.
Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. - Petrobras
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors PBR over PAGS, 58 versus 45 as of Oct 31, 2026. PBR's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while PAGS holds the stronger risk resilience profile. PBR also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors PAGS. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PBR today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. PBR lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 13 points over 30 sessions.
Compare PagSeguro Digital Ltd. and Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. - Petrobras 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 PAGS and PBR 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.
- Quality38 vs 72PBR +34
- Momentum24 vs 46PBR +22
- Risk Resilience35 vs 24PAGS +11
- Value75 vs 70PAGS +5
3 of 6 evidence groups favor PBR. PBR’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; PAGS keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
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 -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -6
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 7 active signals are unchanged.
PBR's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — PAGS and PBR both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
PBR (Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. - Petrobras): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
PAGS (PagSeguro Digital Ltd.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, value, valuation — but at materially higher volatility, 88.7% against 51.3%.
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
PBRPBR on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
PBRPBR on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
PAGSPAGS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 5 points.
Momentum
PBRPBR on the Momentum factor, by 22 points.
Lower downside
PAGSPAGS on Risk Resilience, by 11 points.
Analyst upside
PAGSPAGS on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors PBR, analyst targets favor PAGS. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | PAGS | PBR | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +42.3% | +1.3% | PAGS has more room |
| Target dispersion | +18.6% | +17.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 2 | 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
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PBR. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | PBR | 45 vs 58 |
| Fundamentals | PBRon balance | revenue growth 4% vs 42.8%; EPS growth 2.6% vs 68.8%; TTM ROE 14.6% vs 30.9%; gross margin 51.3% vs 49.2%; operating margin 37.8% vs 32.8% — PBR takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | PAGS | Value 75 vs 70 |
| Technicals | PBR | Price vs 50-day -18.5% vs 0.9%; vs 200-day -14.6% vs 15.7% |
| Risk Resilience | PAGS | Risk Resilience 35 vs 24 |
| Analyst expectations | PAGS | Target upside 42.3% vs 1.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of PAGS and PBR 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 13 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 PBR.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28PBR lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 13 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- PBR +13
- 45 vs 58
- 7 sessions ago
- PBR +10
- 57 vs 67
- 30 sessions ago
- PBR +10
- 57 vs 67
- 90 sessions ago
- PBR +5
- 50 vs 55
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 / 4 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only PAGS
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.85%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
3 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only PBR
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (14.78%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 4 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode, Keltner Channel Breakdown, MACD Bearish Crossover.
PBR 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 -1.61%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.68%, 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.
- 1PAGS closes the Quality gap — currently 34 points behind, the largest single contributor to PBR's edge.
- 2PAGS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3PBR's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 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
PBR leads on balance| Metric | PAGS | PBR |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 4% | 42.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 2.6% | 68.8% |
| Gross margin | 51.3% | 49.2% |
| Operating margin | 37.8% | 32.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 14.6% | 30.9% |
| Debt to equity | 3.1 | 0.76 |
Performance
PBR leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | PAGS | PBR |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -16.9% | -8.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -8.4% | 5.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -17.2% | 15.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -17.3% | 0.8% |
| Year to date | -12.4% | 85.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -14.4% | 87.6% |
Technicals
PBR has the stronger structure| Metric | PAGS | PBR |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 28.3 | 33.2 |
| ADX (14) | 33.2 | 40.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -18.5% | 0.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | -14.6% | 15.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 88.7% | 51.3% |
Risk
PAGS is the more resilient| Metric | PAGS | PBR |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.45 | -0.35 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.11 | 1.72 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.14 | 2.3 |
| Max drawdown | -32.1% | -27.4% |
| Current drawdown | -32.1% | -15.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 54.1% | 38.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.7% | -3.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, PAGS or PBR?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, PBR is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 58 against PAGS's 45. The edge comes from quality and momentum. PAGS is not without a case — it holds the better risk resilience 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 PAGS or PBR the better buy right now?
PBR carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 3 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 PBR over PAGS?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. PBR leads Quality by 34 points; PBR leads Momentum by 22 points; PAGS leads Risk Resilience by 11 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, PAGS or PBR?
Analyst price targets imply +42.3% upside for PAGS and +1.3% for PBR, so the Street currently favors PAGS. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors PBR. 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, PAGS or PBR?
PAGS is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. PAGS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 5 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, PAGS or PBR?
PBR 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, PAGS or PBR?
PBR on the Momentum factor, by 22 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, PAGS or PBR?
PAGS is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. PAGS on Risk Resilience, by 11 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 PAGS more profitable than PBR?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 51.3% vs 49.2%; operating margin 37.8% vs 32.8%; ttm roe 14.6% vs 30.9%. PAGS leads on two measures and PBR 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 PBR's lead over PAGS getting stronger or weaker?
PBR lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 13 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the PAGS vs PBR verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: PAGS closes the Quality gap — currently 34 points behind, the largest single contributor to PBR's edge; PAGS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; PBR's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 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 PAGS and PBR?
PAGS: 2 bullish / 4 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. PBR: 3 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 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 PAGS is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On PBR it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare PAGS and PBR 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.