SRPT vs VRNA Stock Comparison
Compare SRPT and VRNA across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between SRPT and VRNA?
SRPT leads the current stock comparison as Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. vs Verona Pharma plc
SRPT leads
SRPT leads by 12 AIQ points, primarily on Value.
Competitive: 3 of 5 evidence groups support SRPT, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc.
Verona Pharma plc
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SRPT over VRNA, 55 versus 43 as of Sep 11, 2026. SRPT's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value, while VRNA holds the stronger risk resilience profile. 3 of 5 covered evidence groups favor SRPT today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. SRPT lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 12 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. and Verona Pharma plc 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 SRPT and VRNA 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.
- Value64 vs 34SRPT +30
- Risk Resilience38 vs 54VRNA +16
- Quality46 vs 47Even
3 of 5 evidence groups favor SRPT. SRPT’s edge is concentrated in value; VRNA 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 -5
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
SRPT's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SRPT and VRNA both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
SRPT (Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value.
VRNA (Verona Pharma plc): the counter-case, on risk resilience, 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
SRPTSRPT on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
VRNAVRNA on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
SRPTSRPT on the peer-relative Value factor, by 30 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
VRNAVRNA on Risk Resilience, by 16 points.
Analyst upside
SRPTSRPT 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 | SRPT | VRNA | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +14.1% | +0.1% | SRPT has more room |
| Target dispersion | +90% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 6 | 1 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 5 covered evidence groups favor SRPT. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | SRPT | 55 vs 43 |
| Fundamentals | VRNA | revenue growth -45.1% vs 27.3%; EPS growth -101.6% vs 166.8%; TTM ROE -10% vs -1.6%; gross margin 58.6% vs 95.5%; operating margin -7.3% vs 1.3% |
| Valuation | SRPT | Value 64 vs 34 |
| Technicals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Risk Resilience | VRNA | Risk Resilience 38 vs 54 |
| Analyst expectations | SRPT | Target upside 14.1% vs 0.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of SRPT and VRNA 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 12 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 SRPT.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10SRPT lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 12 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- SRPT +12
- 55 vs 43
- 7 sessions ago
- SRPT +15
- 58 vs 43
- 30 sessions ago
- SRPT +11
- 59 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- SRPT +11
- 59 vs 48
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Aug 6 when SRPT moved ahead of VRNA.
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 / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (4.35%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
No active signals
SRPT 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 down over the latest session (price -0.34%, 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.
- 1VRNA closes the Value gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to SRPT's edge.
- 2VRNA generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3SRPT's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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
VRNA leads on balance| Metric | SRPT | VRNA |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -45.1% | 27.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -101.6% | 166.8% |
| Gross margin | 58.6% | 95.5% |
| Operating margin | -7.3% | 1.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -10% | -1.6% |
| Debt to equity | 0.68 | 0.88 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | SRPT | VRNA |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -11.6% | — |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 11.6% | — |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 35.8% | — |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 16.8% | — |
| Year to date | -4.6% | — |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 16.6% | — |
Technicals
Split| Metric | SRPT | VRNA |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 55.2 | — |
| ADX (14) | 32 | — |
| Price vs 50-day | 10.9% | — |
| Price vs 200-day | 6.6% | — |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 79.3% | — |
Risk
VRNA is the more resilient| Metric | SRPT | VRNA |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.1 | — |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.55 | 2.17 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.76 | 3.11 |
| Max drawdown | -39.2% | -0.4% |
| Current drawdown | -16.1% | 0% |
| Annualized volatility | 81.3% | 2.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.6% | -0.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, SRPT or VRNA?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, SRPT is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 55 against VRNA's 43. The edge comes from value. VRNA 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 SRPT or VRNA the better buy right now?
SRPT carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 3 of 5 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 SRPT over VRNA?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. SRPT leads Value by 30 points; VRNA leads Risk Resilience by 16 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, SRPT or VRNA?
Analyst price targets imply +14.1% upside for SRPT and +0.1% for VRNA, so the Street currently favors SRPT. 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, SRPT or VRNA?
SRPT is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. SRPT on the peer-relative Value factor, by 30 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, SRPT or VRNA?
VRNA 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, SRPT or VRNA?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, SRPT or VRNA?
VRNA is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. VRNA on Risk Resilience, by 16 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 SRPT more profitable than VRNA?
VRNA leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 58.6% vs 95.5%; operating margin -7.3% vs 1.3%; ttm roe -10% vs -1.6%.
Is SRPT's lead over VRNA getting stronger or weaker?
SRPT lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 12 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 2026-08-06, when SRPT moved ahead of VRNA.
What would change the SRPT vs VRNA verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: VRNA closes the Value gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to SRPT's edge; VRNA generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover; SRPT's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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 SRPT and VRNA?
SRPT: 2 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. VRNA: No active signals. 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 SRPT is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare SRPT and VRNA 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.