RPAY vs SYF Stock Comparison
Compare RPAY and SYF across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between RPAY and SYF?
SYF leads the current stock comparison as Synchrony Financial, with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Repay Holdings Corporation vs Synchrony Financial
SYF leads
SYF leads by 13 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 23 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors RPAY on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support SYF, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Repay Holdings Corporation
Synchrony Financial
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SYF over RPAY, 59 versus 46 as of Sep 11, 2026. SYF's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and quality, while RPAY holds the stronger value profile. SYF also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors RPAY. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SYF today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. SYF lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 23 to 13 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Repay Holdings Corporation and Synchrony Financial 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 RPAY and SYF 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.
- Risk Resilience25 vs 69SYF +44
- Quality35 vs 60SYF +25
- Value75 vs 67RPAY +8
- Momentum39 vs 44SYF +5
4 of 6 evidence groups favor SYF. SYF’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and quality; RPAY keeps a meaningful value edge.
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 -6
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -11
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
SYF's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — RPAY and SYF both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
SYF (Synchrony Financial): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and quality.
RPAY (Repay Holdings Corporation): the counter-case, on value, valuation, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 59.3% against 28%.
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
SYFSYF on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
RPAYRPAY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 8 points.
Momentum
SYFSYF on the Momentum factor, by 5 points.
Lower downside
SYFSYF on Risk Resilience, by 44 points.
Analyst upside
RPAYRPAY on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors SYF, analyst targets favor RPAY. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | RPAY | SYF | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +24.7% | +16.2% | RPAY has more room |
| Target dispersion | +50.7% | +27.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 10 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SYF. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | SYF | 46 vs 59 |
| Fundamentals | SYFon balance | EPS growth -8.3% vs 14%; TTM ROE -32.6% vs 20.9%; gross margin 73.5% vs 52.3%; operating margin -3.1% vs 24.3% — SYF takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | RPAY | Value 75 vs 67 |
| Technicals | SYF | Price vs 50-day -8% vs -1%; vs 200-day 1.8% vs 0.3% |
| Risk Resilience | SYF | Risk Resilience 25 vs 69 |
| Analyst expectations | RPAY | Target upside 24.7% vs 16.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of RPAY and SYF and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 13 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (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 SYF.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10SYF lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 23 to 13 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- SYF +13
- 46 vs 59
- 7 sessions ago
- SYF +12
- 52 vs 64
- 30 sessions ago
- SYF +23
- 46 vs 69
- 90 sessions ago
- SYF +10
- 56 vs 66
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Jul 9 when SYF moved ahead of RPAY.
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
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (10.67%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.99%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (2.15%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
SYF 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 0%, AIQ -2 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 3 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.73%, AIQ -3 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.
- 1RPAY closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 44 points behind, the largest single contributor to SYF's edge.
- 2RPAY's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3SYF's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 10 points over 30 sessions, and a further 13-point move would eliminate SYF's advantage entirely.
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
SYF leads on balance| Metric | RPAY | SYF |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 24.6% | 0.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -8.3% | 14% |
| Gross margin | 73.5% | 52.3% |
| Operating margin | -3.1% | 24.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -32.6% | 20.9% |
| Debt to equity | 1.64 | 0.97 |
Performance
SYF leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | RPAY | SYF |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -7% | -3.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -5.3% | -5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 5.3% | 8.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 25.4% | 15.7% |
| Year to date | -2.5% | -9.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -39.9% | 0.4% |
Technicals
SYF has the stronger structure| Metric | RPAY | SYF |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 39.3 | 46.1 |
| ADX (14) | 11.3 | 12.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -8% | -1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 1.8% | 0.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 59.3% | 28% |
Risk
SYF is the more resilient| Metric | RPAY | SYF |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.62 | 1.23 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.42 | 0.01 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.74 | 0.01 |
| Max drawdown | -59.7% | -27.9% |
| Current drawdown | -40.3% | -14.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 72.6% | 31.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.5% | -3.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, RPAY or SYF?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, SYF is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 59 against RPAY's 46. The edge comes from risk resilience and quality. RPAY 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 RPAY or SYF the better buy right now?
SYF carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor SYF over RPAY?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. SYF leads Risk Resilience by 44 points; SYF leads Quality by 25 points; RPAY leads Value by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, RPAY or SYF?
Analyst price targets imply +24.7% upside for RPAY and +16.2% for SYF, so the Street currently favors RPAY. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors SYF. 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, RPAY or SYF?
RPAY is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. RPAY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 8 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, RPAY or SYF?
Growth figures are not covered for both names. 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, RPAY or SYF?
SYF 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, RPAY or SYF?
SYF is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SYF on Risk Resilience, by 44 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 RPAY more profitable than SYF?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 73.5% vs 52.3%; operating margin -3.1% vs 24.3%; ttm roe -32.6% vs 20.9%. RPAY leads on one measure and SYF 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 SYF's lead over RPAY getting stronger or weaker?
SYF lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 23 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 2026-07-09, when SYF moved ahead of RPAY.
What would change the RPAY vs SYF verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: RPAY closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 44 points behind, the largest single contributor to SYF's edge; RPAY's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; SYF's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 10 points over 30 sessions, and a further 13-point move would eliminate SYF's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about RPAY and SYF?
RPAY: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. SYF: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 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 RPAY is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On SYF it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare RPAY and SYF 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.