PTC vs VEEV Stock Comparison
Compare PTC and VEEV across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between PTC and VEEV?
VEEV leads the current stock comparison as Veeva Systems Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
PTC Inc. vs Veeva Systems Inc.
VEEV leads
VEEV leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, having only recently taken the lead back from PTC. Wall Street currently favors PTC on target upside.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support VEEV, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
PTC Inc.
Veeva Systems Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors VEEV over PTC, 64 versus 63 as of Sep 6, 2026. VEEV's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience, while PTC holds the stronger value profile. VEEV also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors PTC. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor VEEV today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. VEEV lead: Reversed — PTC led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; VEEV now leads by 1.
Compare PTC Inc. and Veeva Systems 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 PTC and VEEV 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.
- Momentum25%43 vs 85VEEV +42
- Value30%63 vs 38PTC +25
- Quality30%86 vs 74PTC +12
- Risk Resilience15%51 vs 62VEEV +11
2 of 6 evidence groups favor VEEV. VEEV’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience; PTC keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-05, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-04.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
VEEV's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — PTC and VEEV both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
VEEV (Veeva Systems Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.
PTC (PTC Inc.): the counter-case, on value, quality, fundamentals.
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
VEEVVEEV on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
VEEVVEEV on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
PTCPTC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 25 points.
Momentum
VEEVVEEV on the Momentum factor, by 42 points.
Lower downside
VEEVVEEV on Risk Resilience, by 11 points.
Analyst upside
PTCPTC on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors VEEV, analyst targets favor PTC. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | PTC | VEEV | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +15.5% | -0.9% | PTC has more room |
| Target dispersion | +41.7% | +60.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 7 | 20 | 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
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor VEEV. 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 | 63 vs 64 |
| Fundamentals | PTCon balance | revenue growth -22.5% vs 5.1%; EPS growth -79.1% vs 5%; TTM ROE 32.6% vs 14%; gross margin 84.1% vs 74.9%; operating margin 37.8% vs 29.9% — PTC takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | PTC | Value 63 vs 38 |
| Technicals | VEEV | Price vs 50-day 3.3% vs 25%; vs 200-day -5.2% vs 38.5% |
| Risk Resilience | VEEV | Risk Resilience 51 vs 62 |
| Analyst expectations | PTC | Target upside 15.5% vs -0.9% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of PTC and VEEV 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 6 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 lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 VEEV.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 24 – Sep 5VEEV lead: Reversed — PTC led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; VEEV now leads by 1.
- Today
- VEEV +1
- 63 vs 64
- 7 sessions ago
- PTC +5
- 70 vs 65
- 30 sessions ago
- PTC +4
- 71 vs 67
- 90 sessions ago
- Level
- 65 vs 65
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Sep 4 when VEEV moved ahead of PTC.
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 (8.94%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.77%)
4 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (10.77%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
PTC 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -6.04%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -3.27%, 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.
- 1PTC closes the Momentum gap — currently 42 points behind, the largest single contributor to VEEV's edge.
- 2PTC's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3VEEV's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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
PTC leads on balance| Metric | PTC | VEEV |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -22.5% | 5.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -79.1% | 5% |
| Gross margin | 84.1% | 74.9% |
| Operating margin | 37.8% | 29.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 32.6% | 14% |
| Debt to equity | 0.46 | 0.02 |
Performance
VEEV leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | PTC | VEEV |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -10.3% | -0.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -4.5% | 19.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 2.9% | 59.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -13.3% | 40.7% |
| Year to date | -19.1% | 23.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -33.6% | 1.5% |
Technicals
VEEV has the stronger structure| Metric | PTC | VEEV |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 43.8 | 69.9 |
| ADX (14) | 32 | 50.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | 3.3% | 25% |
| Price vs 200-day | -5.2% | 38.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 41.6% | 64% |
Risk
VEEV is the more resilient| Metric | PTC | VEEV |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.48 | 0.6 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.13 | 0.16 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.42 | 0.27 |
| Max drawdown | -47.5% | -50.5% |
| Current drawdown | -34.1% | -10.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 34.8% | 42.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.5% | -3.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, PTC or VEEV?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, VEEV is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 64 against PTC's 63. The edge comes from momentum and risk resilience. PTC is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 PTC or VEEV the better buy right now?
VEEV carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 6, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 6 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 VEEV over PTC?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. VEEV leads Momentum by 42 points; PTC leads Value by 25 points; PTC leads Quality by 12 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, PTC or VEEV?
Analyst price targets imply +15.5% upside for PTC and -0.9% for VEEV, so the Street currently favors PTC. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors VEEV. 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, PTC or VEEV?
PTC is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. PTC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 25 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, PTC or VEEV?
VEEV 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, PTC or VEEV?
VEEV on the Momentum factor, by 42 points. Momentum carries 25% of 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, PTC or VEEV?
VEEV is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. VEEV on Risk Resilience, by 11 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is PTC more profitable than VEEV?
PTC leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 84.1% vs 74.9%; operating margin 37.8% vs 29.9%; ttm roe 32.6% vs 14%.
Is VEEV's lead over PTC getting stronger or weaker?
VEEV lead: Reversed — PTC led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; VEEV now leads by 1. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-24 and 2026-09-05. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-04, when VEEV moved ahead of PTC.
What would change the PTC vs VEEV verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: PTC closes the Momentum gap — currently 42 points behind, the largest single contributor to VEEV's edge; PTC's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; VEEV's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about PTC and VEEV?
PTC: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. VEEV: 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 PTC is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On VEEV it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare PTC and VEEV with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.