SFNC vs VLY Stock Comparison
SFNC currently leads VLY in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 56 vs 54. The clearest difference is quality.
What is the main difference between SFNC and VLY?
SFNC leads the current stock comparison as Simmons First National Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Simmons First National Corporation vs Valley National Bancorp
SFNC leads
SFNC leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from VLY. Wall Street currently favors VLY on target upside.
Fragile: 1 of 6 evidence groups support SFNC, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Simmons First National Corporation
Valley National Bancorp
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SFNC over VLY, 56 versus 54 as of Oct 21, 2026. SFNC's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum. SFNC also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors VLY. 1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SFNC today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. SFNC lead: Reversed — VLY led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; SFNC now leads by 2.
Compare Simmons First National Corporation and Valley National Bancorp across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare SFNC and VLY 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.
- Quality59 vs 55SFNC +4
- Momentum51 vs 47SFNC +4
- Risk Resilience63 vs 61Even
- Value55 vs 54Even
1 of 6 evidence groups favor SFNC. SFNC’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +8
New signals
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +9
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 2 active signals are unchanged.
SFNC's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SFNC and VLY both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
SFNC (Simmons First National Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
VLY (Valley National Bancorp): the counter-case, on 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
SFNCSFNC on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
SFNCSFNC on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
SFNCSFNC on the Momentum factor, by 4 points.
Lower downside
SFNCSFNC carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
VLYVLY on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors SFNC, analyst targets favor VLY. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | SFNC | VLY | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +11.4% | +27.2% | VLY has more room |
| Target dispersion | +13.7% | +12.1% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 5 | 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.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | SFNC | VLY |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 4.56% | 0.00% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $0.680 | $0.440 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $0.850 | $0.440 |
| Years increased | 5 | 0 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #262 | #349 |
SFNC grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 4.56% a year against VLY's 0.00%. Neither company reduced its regular dividend in any year of the window.
Yield and payout ratio shown elsewhere on this page are current values, not part of the study window.
Split-adjusted regular dividends per share, 2020–2025, excluding special dividends. Research as of Sep 19, 2026.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor SFNC. 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 | 56 vs 54 |
| Fundamentals | Even | EPS growth -28.3% vs 10.7%; TTM ROE 7.6% vs 8.9%; gross margin 65.6% vs 50.5%; operating margin 21.2% vs 14.5% |
| Valuation | Even | Value 55 vs 54 |
| Technicals | SFNC | Price vs 50-day 0.1% vs -3.7%; vs 200-day 5.6% vs -3.6% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 63 vs 61 |
| Analyst expectations | VLY | Target upside 11.4% vs 27.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of SFNC and VLY 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 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 1 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 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 SFNC.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20SFNC lead: Reversed — VLY led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; SFNC now leads by 2.
- Today
- SFNC +2
- 56 vs 54
- 7 sessions ago
- VLY +8
- 43 vs 51
- 30 sessions ago
- VLY +3
- 45 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- VLY +8
- 52 vs 60
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Oct 17 when SFNC moved ahead of VLY.
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.
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only SFNC
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish
No signal that the other name lacks.
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
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 up over the latest session (price +0.53%, AIQ +1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +1.01%, 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.
- 1VLY closes the Quality gap — currently 4 points behind, the largest single contributor to SFNC's edge.
- 2VLY generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active.
- 3SFNC'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
Split| Metric | SFNC | VLY |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 0.2% | -62.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -28.3% | 10.7% |
| Gross margin | 65.6% | 50.5% |
| Operating margin | 21.2% | 14.5% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 7.6% | 8.9% |
| Debt to equity | 0.53 | 0.44 |
Performance
SFNC leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | SFNC | VLY |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.8% | 2.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 1.2% | -1.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -1.5% | -11.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 7.3% | -3.8% |
| Year to date | 20.8% | 10.4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 26.4% | 32.6% |
Technicals
SFNC has the stronger structure| Metric | SFNC | VLY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 53.2 | 56.7 |
| ADX (14) | 19.6 | 37.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | 0.1% | -3.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | 5.6% | -3.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 18.1% | 22.4% |
Risk
Split| Metric | SFNC | VLY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.61 | 0.81 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.85 | 1.06 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.25 | 1.78 |
| Max drawdown | -14.9% | -18.3% |
| Current drawdown | -5.6% | -15.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 25% | 25.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2% | -2.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, SFNC or VLY?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, SFNC is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 56 against VLY's 54. The edge comes from quality 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 SFNC or VLY the better buy right now?
SFNC carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 1 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor SFNC over VLY?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. SFNC leads Quality by 4 points; SFNC leads Momentum by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, SFNC or VLY?
Analyst price targets imply +11.4% upside for SFNC and +27.2% for VLY, so the Street currently favors VLY. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors SFNC. 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, SFNC or VLY?
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, SFNC or VLY?
SFNC 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, SFNC or VLY?
SFNC on the Momentum factor, by 4 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, SFNC or VLY?
SFNC is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SFNC carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is SFNC more profitable than VLY?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 65.6% vs 50.5%; operating margin 21.2% vs 14.5%; ttm roe 7.6% vs 8.9%. SFNC leads on two measures and VLY on one measure, 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 SFNC's lead over VLY getting stronger or weaker?
SFNC lead: Reversed — VLY led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; SFNC now leads by 2. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-10-17, when SFNC moved ahead of VLY.
What would change the SFNC vs VLY verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: VLY closes the Quality gap — currently 4 points behind, the largest single contributor to SFNC's edge; VLY generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active; SFNC'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 SFNC and VLY?
SFNC: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. VLY: 2 bullish / 0 bearish. The most decision-relevant rule on SFNC is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On VLY it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare SFNC and VLY 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.