SNA vs TNET Stock Comparison
Compare SNA and TNET across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between SNA and TNET?
TNET leads the current stock comparison as TriNet Group, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Snap-on Incorporated vs TriNet Group, Inc.
TNET leads
TNET leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support TNET, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Snap-on Incorporated
TriNet Group, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TNET over SNA, 57 versus 53 as of Sep 11, 2026. TNET's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while SNA holds the stronger risk resilience profile. TNET also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TNET today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. TNET lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 4 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Snap-on Incorporated and TriNet Group, 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 SNA and TNET 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.
- Momentum20 vs 52TNET +32
- Risk Resilience80 vs 50SNA +30
- Quality67 vs 49SNA +18
- Value54 vs 72TNET +18
3 of 6 evidence groups favor TNET. TNET’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; SNA keeps a meaningful risk resilience 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.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
TNET's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SNA and TNET both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TNET (TriNet Group, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
SNA (Snap-on Incorporated): the counter-case, on risk resilience, quality, fundamentals.
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
TNETTNET on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
SNASNA on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
TNETTNET on the peer-relative Value factor, by 18 points.
Momentum
TNETTNET on the Momentum factor, by 32 points.
Lower downside
SNASNA on Risk Resilience, by 30 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | SNA | TNET | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +13.7% | +13.6% | Level |
| Target dispersion | +24.6% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 4 | 1 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TNET. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | TNET | 53 vs 57 |
| Fundamentals | SNAon balance | revenue growth 2.3% vs -3.9%; EPS growth 5.9% vs -38.6%; TTM ROE 17.4% vs 188.2%; gross margin 51.2% vs 19.1%; operating margin 23.8% vs 6.2% — SNA takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | TNET | Value 54 vs 72 |
| Technicals | TNET | Price vs 50-day -6.5% vs 1.9%; vs 200-day 0.2% vs 27.5% |
| Risk Resilience | SNA | Risk Resilience 80 vs 50 |
| Analyst expectations | Even | Target upside 13.7% vs 13.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of SNA and TNET 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 4 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 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 TNET.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10TNET lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 4 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TNET +4
- 53 vs 57
- 7 sessions ago
- TNET +5
- 55 vs 60
- 30 sessions ago
- TNET +4
- 53 vs 57
- 90 sessions ago
- SNA +3
- 66 vs 63
The lead changed hands 11 times in this window, most recently on Aug 17 when TNET moved ahead of SNA.
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 / 2 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.40%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (24.75%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
TNET 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.
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.16%, AIQ -2 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.3%, 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.
- 1SNA closes the Momentum gap — currently 32 points behind, the largest single contributor to TNET's edge.
- 2SNA's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3TNET'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
SNA leads on balance| Metric | SNA | TNET |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 2.3% | -3.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 5.9% | -38.6% |
| Gross margin | 51.2% | 19.1% |
| Operating margin | 23.8% | 6.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 17.4% | 188.2% |
| Debt to equity | 0.21 | 7.6 |
Performance
TNET leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | SNA | TNET |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.5% | -1.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -8.2% | -0.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -1% | 38.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 1.4% | 82.9% |
| Year to date | 8.8% | 12% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 14.7% | -4.8% |
Technicals
TNET has the stronger structure| Metric | SNA | TNET |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 27.2 | 42.1 |
| ADX (14) | 27.1 | 21.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | -6.5% | 1.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 0.2% | 27.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 10.8% | 39.7% |
Risk
SNA is the more resilient| Metric | SNA | TNET |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.58 | 0.29 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.66 | 0.1 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.13 | 0.14 |
| Max drawdown | -10.6% | -52.7% |
| Current drawdown | -10.6% | -7.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 19.8% | 48.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.8% | -4.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, SNA or TNET?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TNET is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 57 against SNA's 53. The edge comes from momentum and value. SNA is not without a case — it holds the better risk resilience 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 SNA or TNET the better buy right now?
TNET carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 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 4 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor TNET over SNA?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. TNET leads Momentum by 32 points; SNA leads Risk Resilience by 30 points; SNA leads Quality by 18 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, SNA or TNET?
Analyst price targets imply +13.7% upside for SNA and +13.6% for TNET. The model and the Street agree here, which is a broader base of evidence than either alone. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, SNA or TNET?
TNET is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. TNET 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, SNA or TNET?
SNA 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, SNA or TNET?
TNET on the Momentum factor, by 32 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, SNA or TNET?
SNA is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SNA on Risk Resilience, by 30 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 SNA more profitable than TNET?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 51.2% vs 19.1%; operating margin 23.8% vs 6.2%; ttm roe 17.4% vs 188.2%. SNA leads on two measures and TNET 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 TNET's lead over SNA getting stronger or weaker?
TNET lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 4 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 11 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-17, when TNET moved ahead of SNA.
What would change the SNA vs TNET verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SNA closes the Momentum gap — currently 32 points behind, the largest single contributor to TNET's edge; SNA's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; TNET'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 SNA and TNET?
SNA: 2 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. TNET: 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 SNA is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On TNET it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare SNA and TNET 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.