PFG vs SPY Stock Comparison
PFG currently leads SPY in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 59 vs 58. The clearest difference is momentum, while SPY has the stronger quality profile.
What is the main difference between PFG and SPY?
PFG leads the current stock comparison as Principal Financial Group, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Principal Financial Group, Inc. vs State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF
PFG leads
PFG leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from SPY.
Fragile: 2 of 4 evidence groups support PFG, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Principal Financial Group, Inc.
State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors PFG over SPY, 59 versus 58 as of Oct 31, 2026. PFG's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while SPY holds the stronger quality profile. PFG also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor PFG today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. PFG lead: Reversed — SPY led by 16 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; PFG now leads by 1.
Compare Principal Financial Group, Inc. and State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF 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 PFG and SPY 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.
- Momentum60 vs 32PFG +28
- Quality60 vs 83SPY +23
- Risk Resilience63 vs 85SPY +22
- Value56 vs 41PFG +15
2 of 4 evidence groups favor PFG. PFG’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; SPY keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-30, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-29.
Largest factor move: Momentum +4
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -27
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
The lead changed hands: PFG moved ahead of SPY in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — PFG and SPY both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
PFG (Principal Financial Group, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
SPY (State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF): the counter-case, on quality, risk resilience.
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
PFGPFG on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
PFGPFG on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 points.
Momentum
PFGPFG on the Momentum factor, by 28 points.
Lower downside
SPYSPY on Risk Resilience, by 22 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | PFG | SPY | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -2.4% | — | Level |
| Target dispersion | +38.6% | — | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | — | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | — | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor PFG. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 59 vs 58 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | PFG | Value 56 vs 41 |
| Technicals | PFG | Price vs 50-day -0.5% vs -1.5%; vs 200-day 7.8% vs 4.3% |
| Risk Resilience | SPY | Risk Resilience 63 vs 85 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of PFG and SPY and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
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 PFG.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jul 1 – Oct 30PFG lead: Reversed — SPY led by 16 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; PFG now leads by 1.
- Today
- PFG +1
- 59 vs 58
- 7 sessions ago
- SPY +4
- 55 vs 59
- 30 sessions ago
- SPY +16
- 52 vs 68
- 90 sessions ago
- SPY +9
- 55 vs 64
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Oct 30 when PFG moved ahead of SPY.
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 / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only PFG
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only SPY
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (1.02%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (2.6%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active.
SPY is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
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 -1.78%, AIQ +1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -1.77%, AIQ -7 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.
- 1SPY closes the Momentum gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to PFG's edge.
- 2SPY generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover or EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish.
- 3PFG's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 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
Split| Metric | PFG | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 10.7% | — |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -4.7% | — |
| Gross margin | 48.5% | — |
| Operating margin | 12.1% | — |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 13% | — |
| Debt to equity | 0.36 | — |
Performance
PFG leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | PFG | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.8% | -0.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.3% | -1.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -3% | -0.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 10.4% | 4.9% |
| Year to date | 26.6% | 10.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 35.4% | 11.1% |
Technicals
PFG has the stronger structure| Metric | PFG | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 61.4 | 34.3 |
| ADX (14) | 21 | 15.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -0.5% | -1.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | 7.8% | 4.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 20.5% | 11.6% |
Risk
SPY is the more resilient| Metric | PFG | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.56 | 1 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.29 | 0.59 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.12 | 0.89 |
| Max drawdown | -12.8% | -9.1% |
| Current drawdown | -5.8% | -3% |
| Annualized volatility | 22.3% | 12.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.1% | -1.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, PFG or SPY?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, PFG is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 59 against SPY's 58. The edge comes from momentum and value. SPY is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 PFG or SPY the better buy right now?
PFG carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor PFG over SPY?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. PFG leads Momentum by 28 points; SPY leads Quality by 23 points; SPY leads Risk Resilience by 22 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, PFG or SPY?
Analyst price targets imply -2.4% upside for PFG and not covered for SPY. 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, PFG or SPY?
PFG is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. PFG on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 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, PFG or SPY?
Growth figures are not covered for both names. 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, PFG or SPY?
PFG on the Momentum factor, by 28 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, PFG or SPY?
SPY is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SPY on Risk Resilience, by 22 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 PFG more profitable than SPY?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is PFG's lead over SPY getting stronger or weaker?
PFG lead: Reversed — SPY led by 16 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; PFG now leads by 1. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-07-01 and 2026-10-30. The lead has changed hands 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-30, when PFG moved ahead of SPY.
What would change the PFG vs SPY verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SPY closes the Momentum gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to PFG's edge; SPY generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover or EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish; PFG's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; 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 PFG and SPY?
PFG: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. SPY: 3 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 PFG is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On SPY it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
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.