PLTR vs CRWD Stock Comparison
Compare PLTR and CRWD across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between PLTR and CRWD?
PLTR leads the current stock comparison as Palantir Technologies Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Palantir Technologies Inc. vs CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc.
PLTR leads
PLTR leads by 11 AIQ points, primarily on Quality.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support PLTR, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Palantir Technologies Inc.
CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors PLTR over CRWD, 58 versus 47 as of Sep 9, 2026. PLTR's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while CRWD holds the stronger momentum profile. PLTR also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PLTR today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. PLTR lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 11 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Palantir Technologies Inc. and CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price-return comparison using available daily close history.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000
Based on available close-price history. Distribution reinvestment is not added unless already reflected in the source series.
Compare PLTR and CRWD 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.
- Quality97 vs 59PLTR +38
- Momentum57 vs 62CRWD +5
- Risk Resilience49 vs 47Even
- Value24 vs 24Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor PLTR. PLTR’s edge is concentrated in quality; CRWD keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-07, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-06.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
PLTR's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — PLTR and CRWD both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
PLTR (Palantir Technologies Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
CRWD (CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 93.1% against 54%.
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
PLTRPLTR on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
PLTRPLTR on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
CRWDCRWD on the Momentum factor, by 5 points.
Lower downside
PLTRPLTR carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
PLTRPLTR 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 | PLTR | CRWD | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +2.9% | -0.9% | PLTR has more room |
| Target dispersion | +77% | +154.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 12 | 32 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PLTR. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | PLTR | 58 vs 47 |
| Fundamentals | PLTR | revenue growth 18.6% vs 6.2%; EPS growth 22.2% vs -81.1%; TTM ROE 37.5% vs 1.3%; gross margin 84.8% vs 75.2%; operating margin 42.8% vs -2.2% |
| Valuation | Even | Value 24 vs 24 |
| Technicals | CRWD | Price vs 50-day 13.6% vs 4.6%; vs 200-day 15.2% vs 49.6% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 49 vs 47 |
| Analyst expectations | PLTR | Target upside 2.9% vs -0.9% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of PLTR and CRWD 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 moderate at 11 points.
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. (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 PLTR.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 28 – Sep 7PLTR lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 11 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- PLTR +11
- 58 vs 47
- 7 sessions ago
- PLTR +10
- 56 vs 46
- 30 sessions ago
- PLTR +13
- 66 vs 53
- 90 sessions ago
- PLTR +2
- 54 vs 52
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Jul 1 when PLTR moved ahead of CRWD.
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.
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.99%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.89%)
4 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (40.93%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
PLTR 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 -2.31%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.45%, 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.
- 1CRWD closes the Quality gap — currently 38 points behind, the largest single contributor to PLTR's edge.
- 2CRWD's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed.
- 3PLTR's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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
PLTR leads on balance| Metric | PLTR | CRWD |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 18.6% | 6.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 22.2% | -81.1% |
| Gross margin | 84.8% | 75.2% |
| Operating margin | 42.8% | -2.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 37.5% | 1.3% |
| Debt to equity | 0.02 | 0.16 |
Performance
CRWD leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | PLTR | CRWD |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -6.4% | -2.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 1.3% | -0.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 28.6% | 27% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 10.9% | 98.7% |
| Year to date | -1.9% | 81.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 12.5% | 106.3% |
Technicals
CRWD has the stronger structure| Metric | PLTR | CRWD |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 51.3 | 49.7 |
| ADX (14) | 31.3 | 21.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 13.6% | 4.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 15.2% | 49.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 54% | 93.1% |
Risk
Split| Metric | PLTR | CRWD |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.99 | -1.17 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.41 | 0.98 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.7 | 2.75 |
| Max drawdown | -48.2% | -77.1% |
| Current drawdown | -15.9% | -72.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 61.1% | 314.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.1% | -5.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, PLTR or CRWD?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, PLTR is the stronger of the two as of Sep 9, 2026, scoring 58 against CRWD's 47. The edge comes from quality. CRWD is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 PLTR or CRWD the better buy right now?
PLTR carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 9, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor PLTR over CRWD?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. PLTR leads Quality by 38 points; CRWD leads Momentum by 5 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, PLTR or CRWD?
Analyst price targets imply +2.9% upside for PLTR and -0.9% for CRWD, so the Street currently favors PLTR. 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, PLTR or CRWD?
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, PLTR or CRWD?
PLTR 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, PLTR or CRWD?
CRWD on the Momentum factor, by 5 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, PLTR or CRWD?
PLTR is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. PLTR carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is PLTR more profitable than CRWD?
PLTR leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 84.8% vs 75.2%; operating margin 42.8% vs -2.2%; ttm roe 37.5% vs 1.3%.
Is PLTR's lead over CRWD getting stronger or weaker?
PLTR lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 11 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-28 and 2026-09-07. The lead has changed hands 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-01, when PLTR moved ahead of CRWD.
What would change the PLTR vs CRWD verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CRWD closes the Quality gap — currently 38 points behind, the largest single contributor to PLTR's edge; CRWD's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed; PLTR's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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 PLTR and CRWD?
PLTR: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. CRWD: 4 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. 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 PLTR is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On CRWD it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare PLTR and CRWD with others
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.