ROIV vs VRNA Stock Comparison
Compare ROIV and VRNA across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between ROIV and VRNA?
ROIV leads the current stock comparison as Roivant Sciences Ltd., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Roivant Sciences Ltd. vs Verona Pharma plc
ROIV leads
ROIV leads by 13 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience, and the lead has widened from 10 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors VRNA on target upside.
Stable: 2 of 5 evidence groups support ROIV, its lead is widening, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Roivant Sciences Ltd.
Verona Pharma plc
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ROIV over VRNA, 56 versus 43 as of Sep 11, 2026. ROIV's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience. Analyst target upside, however, currently favors VRNA. 2 of 5 covered evidence groups favor ROIV today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: only 2 of 5 covered evidence groups agree. ROIV lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 13 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Roivant Sciences Ltd. and Verona Pharma plc 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 ROIV and VRNA 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.
- Quality60 vs 47ROIV +13
- Risk Resilience61 vs 54ROIV +7
- Value34 vs 34Even
2 of 5 evidence groups favor ROIV. ROIV’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
ROIV's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ROIV and VRNA both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ROIV (Roivant Sciences Ltd.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
VRNA (Verona Pharma plc): the counter-case, on fundamentals, analyst expectations.
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
ROIVROIV on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
VRNAVRNA on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
ROIVROIV on Risk Resilience, by 7 points.
Analyst upside
VRNAVRNA on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors ROIV, analyst targets favor VRNA. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | ROIV | VRNA | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -2% | +0.1% | VRNA has more room |
| Target dispersion | +15% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 5 | 1 | 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 5 covered evidence groups favor ROIV. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | ROIV | 56 vs 43 |
| Fundamentals | VRNA | revenue growth -42.8% vs 27.3%; EPS growth -160.5% vs 166.8%; TTM ROE -6.1% vs -1.6%; gross margin 81.2% vs 95.5%; operating margin -181.4% vs 1.3% |
| Valuation | Even | Value 34 vs 34 |
| Technicals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Risk Resilience | ROIV | Risk Resilience 61 vs 54 |
| Analyst expectations | VRNA | Target upside -2% vs 0.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ROIV and VRNA and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 13 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Only 2 of 5 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (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 ROIV.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10ROIV lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 13 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- ROIV +13
- 56 vs 43
- 7 sessions ago
- ROIV +6
- 49 vs 43
- 30 sessions ago
- ROIV +10
- 58 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- ROIV +11
- 59 vs 48
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Jun 11 when ROIV moved ahead of VRNA.
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.
6 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (23.86%)
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
No active signals
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 -0.29%, AIQ -1 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.
- 1VRNA closes the Quality gap — currently 13 points behind, the largest single contributor to ROIV's edge.
- 2VRNA generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3ROIV'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
VRNA leads on balance| Metric | ROIV | VRNA |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -42.8% | 27.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -160.5% | 166.8% |
| Gross margin | 81.2% | 95.5% |
| Operating margin | -181.4% | 1.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -6.1% | -1.6% |
| Debt to equity | 0.03 | 0.88 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | ROIV | VRNA |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 19.8% | — |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 13.2% | — |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 44.1% | — |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 38.4% | — |
| Year to date | 88.7% | — |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 217.1% | — |
Technicals
Split| Metric | ROIV | VRNA |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 64.9 | — |
| ADX (14) | 20.2 | — |
| Price vs 50-day | 14.4% | — |
| Price vs 200-day | 42.1% | — |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 75.4% | — |
Risk
ROIV is the more resilient| Metric | ROIV | VRNA |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.01 | — |
| Sharpe ratio | 2.53 | 2.17 |
| Sortino ratio | 6 | 3.11 |
| Max drawdown | -12.8% | -0.4% |
| Current drawdown | -2.1% | 0% |
| Annualized volatility | 46.6% | 2.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.9% | -0.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ROIV or VRNA?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ROIV is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 56 against VRNA's 43. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. 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 ROIV or VRNA the better buy right now?
ROIV carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 2 of 5 covered evidence groups agree. A Stable rating means the gap is wide and the evidence is broad, so the conclusion is unlikely to turn on a single session.
Why does the AIQ Score favor ROIV over VRNA?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. ROIV leads Quality by 13 points; ROIV leads Risk Resilience by 7 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ROIV or VRNA?
Analyst price targets imply -2% upside for ROIV and +0.1% for VRNA, so the Street currently favors VRNA. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors ROIV. 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, ROIV or VRNA?
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, ROIV or VRNA?
VRNA 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, ROIV or VRNA?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, ROIV or VRNA?
ROIV is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ROIV on Risk Resilience, by 7 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 ROIV more profitable than VRNA?
VRNA leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 81.2% vs 95.5%; operating margin -181.4% vs 1.3%; ttm roe -6.1% vs -1.6%.
Is ROIV's lead over VRNA getting stronger or weaker?
ROIV lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 13 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-06-11, when ROIV moved ahead of VRNA.
What would change the ROIV vs VRNA verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: VRNA closes the Quality gap — currently 13 points behind, the largest single contributor to ROIV's edge; VRNA generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover; ROIV'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 ROIV and VRNA?
ROIV: 6 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. VRNA: No active signals. The most decision-relevant rule on ROIV is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare ROIV and VRNA 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.