TCBI vs VLY Stock Comparison
TCBI currently leads VLY in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 56 vs 54. The clearest difference is risk resilience, while VLY has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between TCBI and VLY?
TCBI leads the current stock comparison as Texas Capital Bancshares, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Texas Capital Bancshares, Inc. vs Valley National Bancorp
TCBI leads
TCBI leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 6 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors VLY on target upside.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support TCBI, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Texas Capital Bancshares, Inc.
Valley National Bancorp
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TCBI over VLY, 56 versus 54 as of Oct 21, 2026. TCBI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and quality, while VLY holds the stronger momentum profile. TCBI also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors VLY. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TCBI today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. TCBI lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 2 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Texas Capital Bancshares, Inc. 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 TCBI 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.
- Risk Resilience75 vs 61TCBI +14
- Momentum36 vs 47VLY +11
- Quality65 vs 55TCBI +10
- Value53 vs 54Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor TCBI. TCBI’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and quality; VLY keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
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 +4
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.
TCBI's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — TCBI and VLY both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TCBI (Texas Capital Bancshares, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and quality.
VLY (Valley National Bancorp): the counter-case, on momentum, technicals, 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
TCBITCBI on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
TCBITCBI on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
VLYVLY on the Momentum factor, by 11 points.
Lower downside
TCBITCBI on Risk Resilience, by 14 points.
Analyst upside
VLYVLY on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors TCBI, analyst targets favor VLY. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | TCBI | VLY | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +17.4% | +27.2% | VLY has more room |
| Target dispersion | +12.8% | +12.1% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 4 | 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.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TCBI. 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 | TCBI | revenue growth -9.9% vs -62.6%; EPS growth 13.3% vs 10.7%; TTM ROE 10% vs 8.9%; gross margin 62.4% vs 50.5%; operating margin 24.8% vs 14.5% |
| Valuation | Even | Value 53 vs 54 |
| Technicals | VLY | Price vs 50-day -2.3% vs -3.7%; vs 200-day -7.6% vs -3.6% |
| Risk Resilience | TCBI | Risk Resilience 75 vs 61 |
| Analyst expectations | VLY | Target upside 17.4% vs 27.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of TCBI 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 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (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)
- Signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. (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 TCBI.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20TCBI lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 2 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TCBI +2
- 56 vs 54
- 7 sessions ago
- TCBI +2
- 53 vs 51
- 30 sessions ago
- TCBI +6
- 54 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- TCBI +3
- 63 vs 60
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Aug 12 when TCBI 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.
1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
Only TCBI
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (3.00%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish
Only VLY
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (1.05%)
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
TCBI 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 +2.67%, 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 Risk Resilience gap — currently 14 points behind, the largest single contributor to TCBI's edge.
- 2VLY generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active.
- 3TCBI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 2-point move would eliminate TCBI's advantage entirely.
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
TCBI leads on balance| Metric | TCBI | VLY |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -9.9% | -62.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 13.3% | 10.7% |
| Gross margin | 62.4% | 50.5% |
| Operating margin | 24.8% | 14.5% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 10% | 8.9% |
| Debt to equity | 0.23 | 0.44 |
Performance
VLY leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | TCBI | VLY |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.6% | 2.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -3.6% | -1.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -11.5% | -11.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -12.4% | -3.8% |
| Year to date | 0.6% | 10.4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 18.1% | 32.6% |
Technicals
VLY has the stronger structure| Metric | TCBI | VLY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 43 | 56.7 |
| ADX (14) | 28.4 | 37.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | -2.3% | -3.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | -7.6% | -3.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 20.5% | 22.4% |
Risk
TCBI is the more resilient| Metric | TCBI | VLY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.75 | 0.81 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.54 | 1.06 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.72 | 1.78 |
| Max drawdown | -17.9% | -18.3% |
| Current drawdown | -15.5% | -15.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 25.3% | 25.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.2% | -2.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, TCBI or VLY?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TCBI is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 56 against VLY's 54. The edge comes from risk resilience and quality. VLY 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 TCBI or VLY the better buy right now?
TCBI carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 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 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor TCBI over VLY?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. TCBI leads Risk Resilience by 14 points; VLY leads Momentum by 11 points; TCBI leads Quality by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, TCBI or VLY?
Analyst price targets imply +17.4% upside for TCBI and +27.2% for VLY, so the Street currently favors VLY. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors TCBI. 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, TCBI 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, TCBI or VLY?
TCBI 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, TCBI or VLY?
VLY on the Momentum factor, by 11 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, TCBI or VLY?
TCBI is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TCBI on Risk Resilience, by 14 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 TCBI more profitable than VLY?
TCBI leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 62.4% vs 50.5%; operating margin 24.8% vs 14.5%; ttm roe 10% vs 8.9%.
Is TCBI's lead over VLY getting stronger or weaker?
TCBI lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 2 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-12, when TCBI moved ahead of VLY.
What would change the TCBI vs VLY verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: VLY closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 14 points behind, the largest single contributor to TCBI's edge; VLY generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active; TCBI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 2-point move would eliminate TCBI's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about TCBI and VLY?
TCBI: 1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. VLY: 2 bullish / 0 bearish. 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 TCBI is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On VLY it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare TCBI 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.