SteadyShares vs Stockopedia
Stockopedia's StockRanks are a serious, well-researched quantitative system. Here is where it beats us, and where we think our approach is more honest.
Stockopedia is the more rigorous quantitative product, particularly for UK investors. We are more transparent about method and considerably cheaper, being free.
Where Stockopedia is better
Quality, Value and Momentum ranks built on academic factor research, with a long track record published openly. That is a serious piece of work and we do not have an equivalent.
They are strongest exactly where most US-centric tools are weakest, and their UK data is excellent.
They show how their ranks have actually performed over time. We are new and have no track record to show you, and you should discount us accordingly.
Where we are better
Stockopedia is a paid subscription. Our screens, guides, glossary and research are free and require no account.
Ours are printed on the page. A composite rank is a black box by construction, however good the box.
Factor investing has long, brutal stretches of underperformance, and value spent over a decade underperforming badly. We say that on the page rather than in a footnote.
If you are a serious UK investor who wants a tested quantitative ranking system and will pay for it, Stockopedia is the better tool.
If you want transparency about method and a free education library, start here.
See the difference in thirty seconds
Open any of our 30 screens. Every one prints the exact criteria it used, and the circumstances in which it is wrong. Free, no account.
See the screensWe have tried to describe Stockopedia fairly and to concede the points where it genuinely beats us. If we have got something wrong or out of date, tell us and we will correct it. Nothing here is financial advice.