Home Compare FTK.DE vs VZN.SW
Stock Comparison · Single-driver result

flatexDEGIRO vs VZ Holding: Which Stock Looks Stronger in 2026?

VZ holds the cleaner structural position, with stability as the main driver and growth adding further support. flatexDEGIRO SE still has the edge on growth, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. In the market, flatexDEGIRO SE carries the stronger setup — intact trend against VZ's broken trend. That leaves a split case: the structural lead stays with VZ, but the market is not currently confirming it.

The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels. Both peer scores are relative to the STOXX 600 universe, making them directly comparable.

Updated 2026-07-05

The comparison is mainly decided in stability, with the rest of the profile carrying less weight. The overall score gap is 11 points in favour of VZ Holding AG.

Trajectory Similarity
0.75
Similar
Peer-set rank: #2
within flatexDEGIRO SE's functional peer set

This pair is matched through long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.

The pair sits on a clearly comparable long-term path, though it is not a near-twin match.

Most of the shared profile comes through operating margin level and capital structure.

Similarity drivers
operating margin levelcapital structure
How to read the score
0.85–1.00 · Very similar0.70–0.84 · Similar0.55–0.69 · Moderately similarbelow 0.55 · Loose match
Peer-Relative Score
FTK.DE
flatexDEGIRO SE
43
Peer-Score
Signal qualityMedium
Peer basis: STOXX 600
vs
VZN.SW
VZ Holding AG
54
Peer-Score
Signal qualityMedium
Peer basis: STOXX 600

Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.

The clearest separation appears in stability.

Dimension spread: FTK.DE vs VZN.SW Profitability 32 56 Stability 12 81 Valuation 51 49 Growth 77 31 FTK.DE VZN.SW
Gap Ranking
#1 Stability +69
#2 Growth +46
#3 Profitability +24
#4 Valuation +2
Price Setup

Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.

Price setup map for FTK.DE and VZN.SW Stronger + cheaper Stronger + richer Weaker + cheaper Weaker + richer FTK.DEVZN.SW Relative valuation Structural strength

The setup remains mixed because the stronger profile and the more supportive price setup do not sit on the same side.

Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.

Entry today — historical context

Where FTK.DE and VZN.SW each sit in their own 5-year price and valuation history.

BASED ON 5-YEAR HISTORY FTK.DE Elevated · above norm 0th 50th 100th 9 pct gap VZN.SW Elevated · above norm 0th 50th 100th 98th 89th
FTK.DE (98th percentile) and VZN.SW (89th percentile) both sit in the upper portion of their own 5-year ranges. The historical entry context is broadly similar for both. This reflects entry timing, not which company is structurally stronger.

Describes historical entry positioning only. Descriptive — not investment advice.

Relative Position vs Comparable Companies
Stability
VZ Holding AG ranks near the top of the group on stability; flatexDEGIRO SE sits in the weaker half.
Growth
On growth, the gap still runs the same way: flatexDEGIRO SE sits near the top of the group, while VZ Holding AG remains in the weaker half.
Stability — Dominant Gap
FTK.DE
12
VZN.SW
81
Gap+69in favour of VZN.SW

The stability gap is very wide, with the stronger side looking materially steadier through time.

What keeps the gap from being one-sided

Earnings growth also leans toward FTK.DE, which keeps the score lead from reading as a full growth sweep.

What this means for the comparison

The stability lead is clear, but pricing and growth still pull in the other direction — the result holds, but not without friction.

Explore full peer positioning in AssetNext

Break down the FTK.DE vs VZN.SW comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.

Explore full breakdown →
Other comparisons with conflicting dimension signals

Explore how FTK.DE and VZN.SW each compare against other companies in their peer groups.

Rule-based, descriptive analysis only. Derived from peer percentile dimensions. Not investment advice. Peer groups are determined algorithmically based on structural similarity — not by sector classification alone.

How AssetNext Peer Scores Work

AssetNext scores reflect each company's structural position within its functional peer group — not a ranking against all stocks simultaneously. Peers are identified by similarity across eight financial dimensions, including revenue growth trajectory, margin structure, capital intensity, and earnings stability. A score of 75 means the company ranks in the top quartile within its own peer group, not the entire market.

Four dimension scores drive the overall peer score: Growth (revenue trajectory and expansion dynamics), Quality (margin structure and capital efficiency), Valuation (peer-relative pricing on standard multiples), and Stability (earnings consistency and financial predictability). Each dimension is scored 0–100 relative to the peer group, then combined into an overall peer score using equal weighting.

Because scores are peer-relative, the same company can have slightly different scores in different index universes. On comparison pages, both companies are shown within their shared peer universe wherever possible — so the scores are directly comparable. The peer basis is stated on each score card.

Scores are recalculated periodically as underlying financial data is updated. All analysis is descriptive and rule-based — AssetNext describes structural realities and never issues buy, sell or hold recommendations.