Acutic vs Simply Wall St (2026)

Who this is for

You already use Simply Wall St — or you tried it. The Snowflake chart gave you a quick read on a stock's fundamentals, the price was hard to argue with, and the 120,000-stock coverage meant nothing was missing. But somewhere along the way, the tool stopped keeping up with how you actually invest. The five-axis visual answered “what does this stock look like?” and stopped there. You wanted the next step: an evidence trail, a written thesis, a way to track whether your process actually works.

That gap is what Acutic was built for. Acutic is research and analysis software for self-directed investors who think in systems. Multi-agent AI does deep research on candidates, you write down a thesis, you journal what you do, and an evaluation module checks how your process performed across multiple time windows. Acutic is not an advisor and never names instruments to act on — it is a research workspace.

TL;DR. Simply Wall St is the better tool if you want a fast visual snapshot of any of 120,000 stocks for around €10 a month, and you make decisions by feel. Acutic is the better tool if you want a full research workflow — strategy, screening, AI research, journal, evaluation — and you want evidence, not vibes. Many investors will use both.

Quick comparison

Pricing and coverage figures sourced from each vendor's public pricing page in early 2026. Acutic pricing is to be announced.

Where Simply Wall St clearly wins

Acutic exists in part because Simply Wall St built something genuinely useful first. Three things make it hard to beat in its own lane:

1. The Snowflake chart is one of the best visualisations in the category

Five axes — Value, Future Growth, Past Performance, Financial Health, Dividends — collapsed into one shape you can read in two seconds. Nothing else in retail finance comes close to that compression of information per pixel. If you mostly want a quick read on whether a stock looks broadly healthy before you go deeper, the Snowflake is still the fastest tool to reach for. Acutic does not try to replicate it; it solves a different problem.

2. Coverage is genuinely global

120,000+ stocks across 90 markets is enormous. Whether you follow ASX micro-caps, European mid-caps, or Asian dividend payers, you can pull a Snowflake on almost any ticker that matters. Acutic launches with US equities and ETFs and will widen out from there; if you actively research international small-caps today, that is a real difference, and Simply Wall St has it.

3. Beginner UX and a price that does not gate-keep

Around €10 per month is a generous entry point, especially compared with terminals that ask for €30 to €50. Combined with low-jargon copy and visual summaries, that pricing has earned Simply Wall St a user base in the millions. If you're newer to fundamentals and want a tool that does not assume you already speak EBITDA, Simply Wall St is calibrated for you in a way few tools are.

Where Acutic wins

Acutic is built around a different hypothesis: that the limit on retail investing outcomes is not access to data — it is process. A Snowflake tells you what a stock looks like; it does not help you write down why you took a position, what would change your mind, and whether your last twenty decisions actually paid off. That gap is where Acutic lives.

1. Multi-agent AI research, with a live model

On any candidate, Acutic dispatches a small team of specialised LLM agents — a quality analyst, a technical-setup analyst, a fundamentals analyst, a news analyst, and a risk agent — each scoped to its own evidence and its own output schema. Outputs are Zod-validated, cited, and rendered side-by-side so you can see where they agree and where they disagree. By contrast, Simply Wall St's analytical model has not been substantially refreshed in roughly four years; the Snowflake you see today uses much the same logic it did then.

2. A 7-factor score with the math shown

Acutic's score is composed of seven sub-scores — quality, growth, valuation, momentum, sentiment, risk, and balance-sheet health — each visible, each defended by cited evidence, and each tunable through your own strategy template. The full model lives on the public methodology page and on a public score-backtest report. Simply Wall St publishes the five Snowflake axes; Acutic publishes the math, the prompts, and the back-tested behaviour.

3. The full workflow, in one product

Strategy template → universe screener → AI research → scoring → portfolio tracking → rule-violation alerts → trade journal → evaluation. That is one continuous loop, in one product. Simply Wall St covers a slice of this: snapshot view plus a transaction-based portfolio tracker that launched in early 2025. For thesis writing, journal entries, or post-decision evaluation, you would have to stitch a second tool — typically a notebook or a spreadsheet — on the side.

4. Journal and evaluation built in

Every position in Acutic carries a written thesis, a set of rules, and a set of milestones. A separate evaluation module checks, at 30 / 90 / 180 / 365 days, how the position performed against your thesis, whether you broke any of your own rules, and what the cost was. Over time it produces a personal process-quality report. This is the part most retail tools skip entirely, and it is the part most professional investors say matters most.

5. Honest framing — research, not signals

Acutic does not produce per-user instructions on specific instruments and never ranks tickers as a personal fit for any individual reader. It produces analysis you read and act on yourself. That posture is partly a regulatory choice (Acutic operates as a research and analysis service under MAR Art. 20 / §85 WpHG, not as an advisor) and partly an editorial one: the brand line is Research, not signals.

Who should pick which — a decision framework

The honest answer is that these tools optimise for different jobs. Use this short framework to decide:

What you might also be looking at

If “Simply Wall St alternative” brought you here, you are likely also evaluating the score-only end of the market. We wrote an honest comparison of Acutic vs Danelfin for that case. Across the category we have one rule: every comparison names the place where the other tool is genuinely the better choice. Credibility comes from candour, not from claiming a clean sweep.