V vs PYPL Stock Comparison
PYPL currently leads V in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 67 vs 66. The clearest difference is value, while V has the stronger quality profile.
What is the main difference between V and PYPL?
PYPL leads the current stock comparison as PayPal Holdings, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Visa Inc. vs PayPal Holdings, Inc.
PYPL leads
PYPL leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Value, but the lead has narrowed from 6 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors V on target upside.
Fragile: 1 of 6 evidence groups support PYPL, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Visa Inc.
PayPal Holdings, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors PYPL over V, 67 versus 66 as of Oct 21, 2026. PYPL's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value, while V holds the stronger quality profile. PYPL also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors V. 1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PYPL today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. PYPL lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 1 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Visa Inc. and PayPal Holdings, Inc. 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 V and PYPL 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.
- Value24 vs 63PYPL +39
- Quality90 vs 64V +26
- Momentum87 vs 80V +7
- Risk Resilience64 vs 62Even
1 of 6 evidence groups favor PYPL. PYPL’s edge is concentrated in value; V keeps a meaningful quality 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 -3, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 7 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +2, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
New signals
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
PYPL's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — V and PYPL both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
PYPL (PayPal Holdings, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value.
V (Visa Inc.): the counter-case, on quality, momentum, fundamentals.
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
PYPLPYPL on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
PYPLPYPL on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
PYPLPYPL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 39 points.
Momentum
VV on the Momentum factor, by 7 points.
Lower downside
VV carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
VV on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors PYPL, analyst targets favor V. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | V | PYPL | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +1.5% | -5.6% | V has more room |
| Target dispersion | +28% | +51.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 17 | 16 | 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
1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor PYPL. 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 | 66 vs 67 |
| Fundamentals | Von balance | revenue growth 3.6% vs 3.9%; EPS growth -5.7% vs 3.3%; TTM ROE 61.3% vs 24.4%; gross margin 80.2% vs 45.8%; operating margin 60.7% vs 18.8% — V takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | PYPL | Value 24 vs 63 |
| Technicals | V | Price vs 50-day 9% vs 2.2%; vs 200-day 18.7% vs 14.2% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 64 vs 62 |
| Analyst expectations | V | Target upside 1.5% vs -5.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of V and PYPL 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 1 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 PYPL.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20PYPL lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 1 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- PYPL +1
- 66 vs 67
- 7 sessions ago
- Level
- 66 vs 66
- 30 sessions ago
- PYPL +6
- 55 vs 61
- 90 sessions ago
- PYPL +9
- 56 vs 65
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Oct 9 when V moved ahead of PYPL.
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.
6 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only V
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (0.0%)
4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only PYPL
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
Both carry 5 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, RSI Overbought, EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish, Uptrend Structure Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
PYPL 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.31%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.11%, 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.
- 1V closes the Value gap — currently 39 points behind, the largest single contributor to PYPL's edge.
- 2V's RSI Overbought resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3PYPL's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 5 points over 30 sessions, and a further 1-point move would eliminate PYPL'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
V leads on balance| Metric | V | PYPL |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 3.6% | 3.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -5.7% | 3.3% |
| Gross margin | 80.2% | 45.8% |
| Operating margin | 60.7% | 18.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 61.3% | 24.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.68 | 0.72 |
Performance
V leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | V | PYPL |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.7% | 1.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 11.6% | 8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 15% | 2.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 27.4% | 12.3% |
| Year to date | 13.9% | -2.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 18.6% | -13.5% |
Technicals
V has the stronger structure| Metric | V | PYPL |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 85 | 85 |
| ADX (14) | 29.1 | 23.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | 9% | 2.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 18.7% | 14.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 18.5% | 24.7% |
Risk
Split| Metric | V | PYPL |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.29 | 1.08 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.72 | -0.26 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.21 | -0.3 |
| Max drawdown | -17.4% | -46.5% |
| Current drawdown | 0% | -21.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 22.1% | 42.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.8% | -3.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, V or PYPL?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, PYPL is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 67 against V's 66. The edge comes from value. V is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 V or PYPL the better buy right now?
PYPL carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 1 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 PYPL over V?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. PYPL leads Value by 39 points; V leads Quality by 26 points; V leads Momentum by 7 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, V or PYPL?
Analyst price targets imply +1.5% upside for V and -5.6% for PYPL, so the Street currently favors V. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors PYPL. 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, V or PYPL?
PYPL is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. PYPL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 39 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, V or PYPL?
PYPL 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, V or PYPL?
V on the Momentum factor, by 7 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, V or PYPL?
V is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. V carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is V more profitable than PYPL?
V leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 80.2% vs 45.8%; operating margin 60.7% vs 18.8%; ttm roe 61.3% vs 24.4%.
Is PYPL's lead over V getting stronger or weaker?
PYPL lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 1 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 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-09, when V moved ahead of PYPL.
What would change the V vs PYPL verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: V closes the Value gap — currently 39 points behind, the largest single contributor to PYPL's edge; v's RSI Overbought resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; PYPL's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 5 points over 30 sessions, and a further 1-point move would eliminate PYPL's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about V and PYPL?
V: 6 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. PYPL: 4 bullish / 1 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 V is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On PYPL it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare V and PYPL 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.