SNAP vs TTD Stock Comparison
Compare SNAP and TTD across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between SNAP and TTD?
TTD leads the current stock comparison as The Trade Desk, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Snap Inc. vs The Trade Desk, Inc.
TTD leads
TTD leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Quality.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support TTD, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Snap Inc.
The Trade Desk, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TTD over SNAP, 57 versus 56 as of Sep 11, 2026. TTD's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while SNAP holds the stronger momentum profile. TTD also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TTD today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. TTD lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Snap Inc. and The Trade Desk, 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 SNAP and TTD 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.
- Quality49 vs 74TTD +25
- Momentum60 vs 50SNAP +10
- Value58 vs 49SNAP +9
- Risk Resilience57 vs 52SNAP +5
2 of 6 evidence groups favor TTD. TTD’s edge is concentrated in quality; SNAP keeps a meaningful momentum 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 +4
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +4
No new signals fired.
TTD's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SNAP and TTD both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TTD (The Trade Desk, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
SNAP (Snap Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, value, risk resilience — but at materially higher volatility, 59.8% against 50.3%.
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
TTDTTD on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
TTDTTD on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
SNAPSNAP on the peer-relative Value factor, by 9 points.
Momentum
SNAPSNAP on the Momentum factor, by 10 points.
Lower downside
SNAPSNAP on Risk Resilience, by 5 points.
Analyst upside
TTDTTD on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | SNAP | TTD | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +23.8% | +34% | TTD has more room |
| Target dispersion | +156.5% | +151% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 15 | 23 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TTD. 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 57 |
| Fundamentals | TTDon balance | revenue growth 4.6% vs 3.8%; EPS growth -84.6% vs 75%; TTM ROE -14.6% vs 16.1%; gross margin 57.3% vs 83%; operating margin -5.1% vs 19.6% — TTD takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | SNAP | Value 58 vs 49 |
| Technicals | SNAP | Price vs 50-day 12.2% vs -12.1%; vs 200-day -4.8% vs -43.3% |
| Risk Resilience | SNAP | Risk Resilience 57 vs 52 |
| Analyst expectations | TTD | Target upside 23.8% vs 34% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of SNAP and TTD 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 1 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. (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 TTD.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10TTD lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TTD +1
- 56 vs 57
- 7 sessions ago
- TTD +2
- 56 vs 58
- 30 sessions ago
- TTD +2
- 56 vs 58
- 90 sessions ago
- TTD +15
- 47 vs 62
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Sep 3 when TTD moved ahead of SNAP.
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 / 2 bearish / 1 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (14.58%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (5.38%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (51.08%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
TTD 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 and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +2.9%, AIQ +1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +2.65%, 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.
- 1SNAP closes the Quality gap — currently 25 points behind, the largest single contributor to TTD's edge.
- 2SNAP's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3TTD's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 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
TTD leads on balance| Metric | SNAP | TTD |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 4.6% | 3.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -84.6% | 75% |
| Gross margin | 57.3% | 83% |
| Operating margin | -5.1% | 19.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -14.6% | 16.1% |
| Debt to equity | 0.44 | 0.17 |
Performance
SNAP leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | SNAP | TTD |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.3% | -4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 6.2% | 3.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 2.6% | -27.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 12.5% | -48.8% |
| Year to date | -31.6% | -63.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -23.5% | -73.2% |
Technicals
SNAP has the stronger structure| Metric | SNAP | TTD |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 55.8 | 58.5 |
| ADX (14) | 28.6 | 17.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | 12.2% | -12.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -4.8% | -43.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 59.8% | 50.3% |
Risk
SNAP is the more resilient| Metric | SNAP | TTD |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.16 | 0.83 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.25 | -2.1 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.39 | -2.87 |
| Max drawdown | -56.8% | -75.9% |
| Current drawdown | -39.3% | -74.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 58.5% | 57.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.6% | -5.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, SNAP or TTD?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TTD is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 57 against SNAP's 56. The edge comes from quality. SNAP is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 SNAP or TTD the better buy right now?
TTD carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor TTD over SNAP?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. TTD leads Quality by 25 points; SNAP leads Momentum by 10 points; SNAP leads Value by 9 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, SNAP or TTD?
Analyst price targets imply +23.8% upside for SNAP and +34% for TTD, so the Street currently favors TTD. 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, SNAP or TTD?
SNAP is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. SNAP on the peer-relative Value factor, by 9 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, SNAP or TTD?
TTD 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, SNAP or TTD?
SNAP on the Momentum factor, by 10 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, SNAP or TTD?
SNAP is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SNAP on Risk Resilience, by 5 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 SNAP more profitable than TTD?
TTD leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 57.3% vs 83%; operating margin -5.1% vs 19.6%; ttm roe -14.6% vs 16.1%.
Is TTD's lead over SNAP getting stronger or weaker?
TTD lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 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 2026-09-03, when TTD moved ahead of SNAP.
What would change the SNAP vs TTD verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SNAP closes the Quality gap — currently 25 points behind, the largest single contributor to TTD's edge; SNAP's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; TTD's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 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 SNAP and TTD?
SNAP: 0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral. TTD: 1 bullish / 2 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 SNAP is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On TTD it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare SNAP and TTD 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.