RZLV vs SDGR Stock Comparison
Compare RZLV and SDGR across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between RZLV and SDGR?
SDGR leads the current stock comparison as Schrödinger, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Rezolve AI PLC vs Schrödinger, Inc.
SDGR leads
SDGR leads by 15 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Momentum. Wall Street currently favors RZLV on target upside.
Stable: 5 of 6 evidence groups support SDGR, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Rezolve AI PLC
Schrödinger, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SDGR over RZLV, 52 versus 37 as of Sep 11, 2026. SDGR's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and momentum. SDGR also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors RZLV. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SDGR today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. SDGR lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 15 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Rezolve AI PLC and Schrödinger, 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 RZLV and SDGR 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 Resilience20 vs 43SDGR +23
- Momentum37 vs 57SDGR +20
- Value34 vs 52SDGR +18
- Quality50 vs 51Even
5 of 6 evidence groups favor SDGR. SDGR’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and momentum.
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.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1
No new signals fired.
SDGR's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — RZLV and SDGR both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
SDGR (Schrödinger, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and momentum.
RZLV (Rezolve AI PLC): the counter-case, on analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 108.7% against 69.8%.
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
SDGRSDGR on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
SDGRSDGR on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
SDGRSDGR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 18 points.
Momentum
SDGRSDGR on the Momentum factor, by 20 points.
Lower downside
SDGRSDGR on Risk Resilience, by 23 points.
Analyst upside
RZLVRZLV on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors SDGR, analyst targets favor RZLV. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | RZLV | SDGR | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +183.8% | -0.1% | RZLV has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 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
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SDGR. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | SDGR | 37 vs 52 |
| Fundamentals | SDGRon balance | EPS growth 45.8% vs 109.9%; TTM ROE -87.2% vs -16.4%; gross margin 66% vs 56.9%; operating margin -185.6% vs -59.2% — SDGR takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | SDGR | Value 34 vs 52 |
| Technicals | SDGR | Price vs 50-day -9.9% vs 8.7%; vs 200-day -14.2% vs 24.2% |
| Risk Resilience | SDGR | Risk Resilience 20 vs 43 |
| Analyst expectations | RZLV | Target upside 183.8% vs -0.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of RZLV and SDGR 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 15 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (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 SDGR.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10SDGR lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 15 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- SDGR +15
- 37 vs 52
- 7 sessions ago
- SDGR +20
- 36 vs 56
- 30 sessions ago
- SDGR +15
- 43 vs 58
- 90 sessions ago
- SDGR +12
- 45 vs 57
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
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.
0 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (5.54%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (15.61%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
SDGR 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 -0.43%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +1.17%, 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.
- 1RZLV closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 23 points behind, the largest single contributor to SDGR's edge.
- 2RZLV's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3SDGR's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 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
SDGR leads on balance| Metric | RZLV | SDGR |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 5.4% | 0.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 45.8% | 109.9% |
| Gross margin | 66% | 56.9% |
| Operating margin | -185.6% | -59.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -87.2% | -16.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.64 | 0.33 |
Performance
SDGR leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | RZLV | SDGR |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.3% | -10% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -14.2% | 0.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -3.8% | 32.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -18.4% | 47.7% |
| Year to date | -10.5% | 5.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -48.2% | -3.3% |
Technicals
SDGR has the stronger structure| Metric | RZLV | SDGR |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 44.6 | 45.2 |
| ADX (14) | 19.5 | 32.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -9.9% | 8.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | -14.2% | 24.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 108.7% | 69.8% |
Risk
SDGR is the more resilient| Metric | RZLV | SDGR |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.93 | 1.59 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.34 | 0.14 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.64 | 0.23 |
| Max drawdown | -72.2% | -50.8% |
| Current drawdown | -70.2% | -16.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 107.8% | 55.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -9.3% | -5.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, RZLV or SDGR?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, SDGR is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 52 against RZLV's 37. The edge comes from risk resilience and momentum. 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 RZLV or SDGR the better buy right now?
SDGR carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 5 of 6 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 SDGR over RZLV?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. SDGR leads Risk Resilience by 23 points; SDGR leads Momentum by 20 points; SDGR leads Value by 18 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, RZLV or SDGR?
Analyst price targets imply +183.8% upside for RZLV and -0.1% for SDGR, so the Street currently favors RZLV. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors SDGR. 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, RZLV or SDGR?
SDGR is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. SDGR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 18 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, RZLV or SDGR?
SDGR 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, RZLV or SDGR?
SDGR on the Momentum factor, by 20 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, RZLV or SDGR?
SDGR is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SDGR on Risk Resilience, by 23 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 RZLV more profitable than SDGR?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 66% vs 56.9%; operating margin -185.6% vs -59.2%; ttm roe -87.2% vs -16.4%. RZLV leads on one measure and SDGR 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 SDGR's lead over RZLV getting stronger or weaker?
SDGR lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 15 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the RZLV vs SDGR verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: RZLV closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 23 points behind, the largest single contributor to SDGR's edge; RZLV's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; SDGR's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 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 RZLV and SDGR?
RZLV: 0 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral. SDGR: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 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 RZLV is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On SDGR it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare RZLV and SDGR 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.