RBLX vs ROKU Stock Comparison
ROKU currently leads RBLX in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 52 vs 51. The clearest difference is quality, while RBLX has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between RBLX and ROKU?
ROKU leads the current stock comparison as Roku, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Roblox Corporation vs Roku, Inc.
ROKU leads
ROKU leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience. Wall Street currently favors RBLX on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support ROKU, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Roblox Corporation
Roku, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ROKU over RBLX, 52 versus 51 as of Oct 31, 2026. ROKU's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while RBLX holds the stronger value profile. ROKU also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors RBLX. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ROKU today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. ROKU lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Roblox Corporation and Roku, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price return from daily closes; distributions are not included.
Price return comparison
Growth of $10,000, price only
Split-adjusted closes only. Distributions are excluded, which understates the return of any fund or stock that pays them.
Compare RBLX and ROKU 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.
- Value56 vs 24RBLX +32
- Quality30 vs 61ROKU +31
- Risk Resilience37 vs 68ROKU +31
- Momentum79 vs 67RBLX +12
3 of 6 evidence groups favor ROKU. ROKU’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; RBLX keeps a meaningful value 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: Risk Resilience -2
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -8
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.
ROKU's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — RBLX and ROKU both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ROKU (Roku, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
RBLX (Roblox Corporation): the counter-case, on value, momentum, valuation — but at materially higher volatility, 45.7% against 12.4%.
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
ROKUROKU on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
ROKUROKU on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
RBLXRBLX on the peer-relative Value factor, by 32 points.
Momentum
RBLXRBLX on the Momentum factor, by 12 points.
Lower downside
ROKUROKU on Risk Resilience, by 31 points.
Analyst upside
RBLXRBLX on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors ROKU, analyst targets favor RBLX. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | RBLX | ROKU | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +17.8% | +4.5% | RBLX has more room |
| Target dispersion | +138.2% | +24.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 17 | 12 | 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 ROKU. 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 | 51 vs 52 |
| Fundamentals | ROKUon balance | revenue growth 1.9% vs 8.5%; EPS growth 25.7% vs 91.4%; TTM ROE -288.8% vs 13.2%; gross margin 78.9% vs 45.5%; operating margin -20.7% vs 5.2% — ROKU takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | RBLX | Value 56 vs 24 |
| Technicals | ROKU | Price vs 50-day -6.5% vs 0%; vs 200-day 1.1% vs 22.1% |
| Risk Resilience | ROKU | Risk Resilience 37 vs 68 |
| Analyst expectations | RBLX | Target upside 17.8% vs 4.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of RBLX and ROKU 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 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (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)
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 ROKU.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28ROKU lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- ROKU +1
- 51 vs 52
- 7 sessions ago
- ROKU +6
- 50 vs 56
- 30 sessions ago
- ROKU +2
- 44 vs 46
- 90 sessions ago
- ROKU +12
- 44 vs 56
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Sep 25 when ROKU moved ahead of RBLX.
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 / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only RBLX
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (14.53%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.54%)
5 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only ROKU
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (21.95%)
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (1.29%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (2.2%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
RBLX 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 and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -18.05%, AIQ -1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -0.77%, AIQ -2 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.
- 1RBLX closes the Quality gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to ROKU's edge.
- 2RBLX's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3ROKU'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
ROKU leads on balance| Metric | RBLX | ROKU |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 1.9% | 8.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 25.7% | 91.4% |
| Gross margin | 78.9% | 45.5% |
| Operating margin | -20.7% | 5.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -288.8% | 13.2% |
| Debt to equity | 12.08 | 0.17 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | RBLX | ROKU |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.4% | -1.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 25.7% | 2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 9.5% | 7.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -5.3% | 37.9% |
| Year to date | -34.2% | 43.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -58.3% | 61.3% |
Technicals
ROKU has the stronger structure| Metric | RBLX | ROKU |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 69.9 | 55.5 |
| ADX (14) | 27.2 | 20.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -6.5% | 0% |
| Price vs 200-day | 1.1% | 22.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 45.7% | 12.4% |
Risk
ROKU is the more resilient| Metric | RBLX | ROKU |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.62 | 1.37 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.99 | 1.21 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.22 | 2.08 |
| Max drawdown | -73.4% | -27.7% |
| Current drawdown | -60.2% | -3% |
| Annualized volatility | 70% | 40.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.3% | -3.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, RBLX or ROKU?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ROKU is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 52 against RBLX's 51. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. RBLX 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 RBLX or ROKU the better buy right now?
ROKU carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 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 ROKU over RBLX?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. RBLX leads Value by 32 points; ROKU leads Quality by 31 points; ROKU leads Risk Resilience by 31 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, RBLX or ROKU?
Analyst price targets imply +17.8% upside for RBLX and +4.5% for ROKU, so the Street currently favors RBLX. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors ROKU. 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, RBLX or ROKU?
RBLX is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. RBLX on the peer-relative Value factor, by 32 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, RBLX or ROKU?
ROKU 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, RBLX or ROKU?
RBLX on the Momentum factor, by 12 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, RBLX or ROKU?
ROKU is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ROKU on Risk Resilience, by 31 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 RBLX more profitable than ROKU?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 78.9% vs 45.5%; operating margin -20.7% vs 5.2%; ttm roe -288.8% vs 13.2%. RBLX leads on one measure and ROKU 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 ROKU's lead over RBLX getting stronger or weaker?
ROKU lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-25, when ROKU moved ahead of RBLX.
What would change the RBLX vs ROKU verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: RBLX closes the Quality gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to ROKU's edge; RBLX's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; ROKU'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 RBLX and ROKU?
RBLX: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. ROKU: 5 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 RBLX is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On ROKU it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare RBLX and ROKU 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.