PFG vs STEP Stock Comparison

PFG currently leads STEP in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 59 vs 57. The clearest difference is value, while STEP has the stronger quality profile.

Market data as of Oct 31, 2026 market close· AIQ score gap 2 points
PFG
Financial Services
vs
STEP
Financial Services
PFG
Principal Financial Group, Inc.
Leads
Price
$112
Day move
-1.78%
AIQ Score
59/100
Best edge
Value
Sector
Financial Services
STEP
StepStone Group Inc.
Price
$43.22
Day move
-2.81%
AIQ Score
57/100
Best edge
Quality
Sector
Financial Services

What is the main difference between PFG and STEP?

PFG leads the current stock comparison as Principal Financial Group, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.

AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison

Principal Financial Group, Inc. vs StepStone Group Inc.

Data as of Oct 31, 2026· market close· Financial Services· Coverage 66/66 fields· High confidence
AIQ VerdictFragileAIQ Comparison Conviction 3/10

PFG leads

PFG leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from STEP. Wall Street currently favors STEP on target upside.

Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support PFG, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.

Evidence agreement: 4 of 6Comparison trend: Reversed
PFG

Principal Financial Group, Inc.

Leads
AIQ Score
59/100
AIQ Edge Score
7/10
STEP

StepStone Group Inc.

AIQ Score
57/100
AIQ Edge Score
6/10

The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors PFG over STEP, 59 versus 57 as of Oct 31, 2026. PFG's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum, while STEP holds the stronger quality profile. PFG also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors STEP. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PFG today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. PFG lead: Reversed — STEP led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; PFG now leads by 2.

Compare Principal Financial Group, Inc. and StepStone Group Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.

Currently unavailable

Performance over time

Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes.

PFG
+96.2%
STEP
+6.2%

Total return comparison

Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested

PFG $19,618 · STEP $10,619

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 STEP against another ticker

Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.

Basic: 2 symbols·Explorer: 3 symbols·Pro and Premium: 5 symbols·Your limit: 2

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.

PFG advantage
0
STEP advantage
  • Quality60 vs 97
    STEP +37
  • Value56 vs 30
    PFG +26
  • Momentum60 vs 41
    PFG +19
  • Risk Resilience63 vs 58
    PFG +5

4 of 6 evidence groups favor PFG. PFG’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum; STEP 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.

PFG+1 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum +4

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.

STEP0 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum +2, not enough on its own to move the overall score.

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.

PFG's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.

Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — PFG and STEP both carry a full feed there.

The central trade-off

PFG (Principal Financial Group, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and momentum.

STEP (StepStone Group Inc.): the counter-case, on quality, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 35.9% against 20.5%.

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

PFG

PFG on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.

Growth

PFG

PFG on combined revenue and EPS growth.

Value

PFG

PFG on the peer-relative Value factor, by 26 points.

Momentum

PFG

PFG on the Momentum factor, by 19 points.

Lower downside

PFG

PFG on Risk Resilience, by 5 points.

Analyst upside

STEP

STEP on implied upside to the consensus price target.

AIQ vs Wall Street

The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors PFG, analyst targets favor STEP. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.

MeasurePFGSTEPNote
Implied upside to target-2.4%+43.5%STEP has more room
Target dispersion+38.6%+56.5%Lower is tighter analyst agreement
ConsensusHoldBuyContext, not a primary driver
Analysts covering88Higher 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 PFG. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.

Evidence groupFavorsReading
AIQ ScoreEven59 vs 57
FundamentalsPFGon balancerevenue growth 10.7% vs -35.6%; EPS growth -4.7% vs -13.5%; TTM ROE 13% vs 156.7%; gross margin 48.5% vs 60.9%; operating margin 12.1% vs -58.2% — PFG takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them
ValuationPFGValue 56 vs 30
TechnicalsPFGPrice vs 50-day -0.5% vs -6.2%; vs 200-day 7.8% vs -12.6%
Risk ResiliencePFGRisk Resilience 63 vs 58
Analyst expectationsSTEPTarget upside -2.4% vs 43.5%

✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of PFG and STEP and are excluded from the count.

AIQ Decision Stability

Fragile

The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.

  • The AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. (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 30

PFG lead: Reversed — STEP led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; PFG now leads by 2.

Jul 1PFG leads above the line · STEP leads belowOct 30
Today
PFG +2
59 vs 57
7 sessions ago
PFG +1
55 vs 54
30 sessions ago
STEP +2
52 vs 54
90 sessions ago
STEP +6
55 vs 61

The lead changed hands 7 times in this window, most recently on Oct 1 when STEP moved ahead of PFG.

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.

PFG

2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral

Only PFG

  • Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (8.28%)
STEPConflicted

1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted

Only STEP

  • Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (7.27%)
  • ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.70%)
  • Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon

Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, MACD Bullish Crossover.

STEP 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.

PFGDivergence

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).

STEPNo material change

Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -2.81%, 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.

  1. 1STEP closes the Value gap — currently 26 points behind, the largest single contributor to PFG's edge.
  2. 2STEP's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
  3. 3PFG's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
  4. 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

PFG leads on balance
MetricPFGSTEP
Revenue growth (YoY)10.7%-35.6%
EPS growth (YoY)-4.7%-13.5%
Gross margin48.5%60.9%
Operating margin12.1%-58.2%
Return on equity (TTM)13%156.7%
Debt to equity0.36-2.91

Performance

PFG leads 6 of 6 windows
MetricPFGSTEP
1 week (5 sessions)2.8%2.8%
1 month (20 sessions)-0.3%-4.5%
3 months (63 sessions)-3%-7.2%
6 months (126 sessions)10.4%-18.1%
Year to date26.6%-32.6%
1 year (252 sessions)35.4%-30.9%

Technicals

PFG has the stronger structure
MetricPFGSTEP
RSI (14)61.447.7
ADX (14)2117
Price vs 50-day-0.5%-6.2%
Price vs 200-day7.8%-12.6%
Volatility (1M, annualized)20.5%35.9%

Risk

PFG is the more resilient
MetricPFGSTEP
Beta0.561.65
Sharpe ratio1.29-0.6
Sortino ratio2.12-0.89
Max drawdown-12.8%-48.2%
Current drawdown-5.8%-43.3%
Annualized volatility22.3%47.8%
Value at risk (95%)-2.1%-4.7%

Straight answers

Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.

Which is better, PFG or STEP?

On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, PFG is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 59 against STEP's 57. The edge comes from value and momentum. STEP 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 STEP the better buy right now?

PFG carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.

Why does the AIQ Score favor PFG over STEP?

The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. STEP leads Quality by 37 points; PFG leads Value by 26 points; PFG leads Momentum by 19 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.

Which has more analyst upside, PFG or STEP?

Analyst price targets imply -2.4% upside for PFG and +43.5% for STEP, so the Street currently favors STEP. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors PFG. 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, PFG or STEP?

PFG is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. PFG 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, PFG or STEP?

PFG 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, PFG or STEP?

PFG on the Momentum factor, by 19 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 STEP?

PFG is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. PFG on Risk Resilience, by 5 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 STEP?

The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 48.5% vs 60.9%; operating margin 12.1% vs -58.2%; ttm roe 13% vs 156.7%. PFG leads on one measure and STEP on two measures, 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 PFG's lead over STEP getting stronger or weaker?

PFG lead: Reversed — STEP led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; PFG now leads by 2. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-07-01 and 2026-10-30. The lead has changed hands 7 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-01, when STEP moved ahead of PFG.

What would change the PFG vs STEP verdict?

The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: STEP closes the Value gap — currently 26 points behind, the largest single contributor to PFG's edge; STEP's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; 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 STEP?

PFG: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. STEP: 1 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 PFG is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On STEP it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).

Compare PFG and STEP 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.