STEP vs TRI Stock Comparison
Compare STEP and TRI across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between STEP and TRI?
STEP leads the current stock comparison as StepStone Group Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
StepStone Group Inc. vs Thomson Reuters Corporation
STEP leads
STEP leads by 16 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, and the lead has widened from 8 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors TRI on target upside.
Competitive: 3 of 6 evidence groups support STEP, and its lead is widening.
StepStone Group Inc.
Thomson Reuters Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors STEP over TRI, 60 versus 44 as of Sep 11, 2026. STEP's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience, while TRI holds the stronger value profile. STEP also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors TRI. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor STEP today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. STEP lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 16 points over 30 sessions.
Compare StepStone Group Inc. and Thomson Reuters Corporation 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 STEP and TRI 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.
- Momentum56 vs 25STEP +31
- Risk Resilience55 vs 25STEP +30
- Quality97 vs 70STEP +27
- Value30 vs 43TRI +13
3 of 6 evidence groups favor STEP. STEP’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience; TRI keeps a meaningful value 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 +1
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -4
No new signals fired.
STEP's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — STEP and TRI both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
STEP (StepStone Group Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.
TRI (Thomson Reuters Corporation): the counter-case, on value, fundamentals, valuation — but at materially higher volatility, 51.4% against 46.1%.
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
STEPSTEP on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
TRITRI on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
TRITRI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 13 points.
Momentum
STEPSTEP on the Momentum factor, by 31 points.
Lower downside
STEPSTEP on Risk Resilience, by 30 points.
Analyst upside
TRITRI on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors STEP, analyst targets favor TRI. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | STEP | TRI | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +27.1% | +36.2% | TRI has more room |
| Target dispersion | +56.3% | +73.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 6 | 4 | 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
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor STEP. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | STEP | 60 vs 44 |
| Fundamentals | TRIon balance | revenue growth -35.6% vs -6.4%; EPS growth -13.5% vs -1.9%; TTM ROE 156.7% vs 14.3%; gross margin 60.9% vs 66.5%; operating margin -58.2% vs 27.6% — TRI takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | TRI | Value 30 vs 43 |
| Technicals | STEP | Price vs 50-day 4.9% vs -1.8%; vs 200-day -7.3% vs -6.1% |
| Risk Resilience | STEP | Risk Resilience 55 vs 25 |
| Analyst expectations | TRI | Target upside 27.1% vs 36.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of STEP and TRI 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 16 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (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 STEP.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10STEP lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 16 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- STEP +16
- 60 vs 44
- 7 sessions ago
- STEP +7
- 62 vs 55
- 30 sessions ago
- STEP +8
- 61 vs 53
- 90 sessions ago
- TRI +5
- 53 vs 58
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Jul 30 when STEP moved ahead of TRI.
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 / 2 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (14.11%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.22%)
1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (2.87%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
TRI is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
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 -0.85%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.71%, 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.
- 1TRI closes the Momentum gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to STEP's edge.
- 2TRI's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3STEP starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 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
TRI leads on balance| Metric | STEP | TRI |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -35.6% | -6.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -13.5% | -1.9% |
| Gross margin | 60.9% | 66.5% |
| Operating margin | -58.2% | 27.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 156.7% | 14.3% |
| Debt to equity | -2.91 | 0.29 |
Performance
STEP leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | STEP | TRI |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.3% | -9.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 2.6% | -6.7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 16.5% | 16.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 8.5% | -8.6% |
| Year to date | -23.1% | -28.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -20.2% | -45.7% |
Technicals
STEP has the stronger structure| Metric | STEP | TRI |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 52.4 | 36.6 |
| ADX (14) | 24.2 | 26.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | 4.9% | -1.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | -7.3% | -6.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 46.1% | 51.4% |
Risk
STEP is the more resilient| Metric | STEP | TRI |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.67 | 0.27 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.27 | -1.1 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.4 | -1.59 |
| Max drawdown | -48.2% | -57.1% |
| Current drawdown | -35.3% | -46.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 48.6% | 49.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.8% | -5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, STEP or TRI?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, STEP is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 60 against TRI's 44. The edge comes from momentum and risk resilience. TRI is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 STEP or TRI the better buy right now?
STEP carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 3 of 6 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 STEP over TRI?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. STEP leads Momentum by 31 points; STEP leads Risk Resilience by 30 points; STEP leads Quality by 27 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, STEP or TRI?
Analyst price targets imply +27.1% upside for STEP and +36.2% for TRI, so the Street currently favors TRI. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors STEP. 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, STEP or TRI?
TRI is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. TRI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 13 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, STEP or TRI?
TRI 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, STEP or TRI?
STEP on the Momentum factor, by 31 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, STEP or TRI?
STEP is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. STEP 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 STEP more profitable than TRI?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 60.9% vs 66.5%; operating margin -58.2% vs 27.6%; ttm roe 156.7% vs 14.3%. STEP leads on one measure and TRI 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 STEP's lead over TRI getting stronger or weaker?
STEP lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 16 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 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-30, when STEP moved ahead of TRI.
What would change the STEP vs TRI verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: TRI closes the Momentum gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to STEP's edge; TRI's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; STEP starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; 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 STEP and TRI?
STEP: 0 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral. TRI: 1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 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 STEP is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On TRI it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare STEP and TRI 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.