SoFi Technologies, Inc. SOFI and Nu Holdings Ltd. NU are often grouped as digital banking disruptors, and the comparison makes sense. Both use mobile-first platforms to attract customers, deepen relationships through cross-selling, gather deposits, extend credit and add investing or other financial tools. Both are also using artificial intelligence to improve engagement and decision-making, while scale is increasingly turning their technology-led models into durable earnings engines.
The difference is where the growth comes from. Nu already operates at enormous scale across Brazil, Mexico and Colombia, so its next phase depends increasingly on monetizing existing customers, expanding credit carefully and entering new markets.
SoFi is smaller, but its U.S.-focused ecosystem is becoming broader, with lending, banking, investing, technology services and digital-asset infrastructure working together. This gives SoFi more visible room to raise products per member and diversify revenues. Both have execution risks, but their growth paths are becoming increasingly distinct rather than interchangeable. This contrast matters for investors.
The Case for SOFI
SoFi’s strongest advantage is that its ecosystem is starting to work more like a connected financial platform than a collection of separate products. Members reached 15.8 million in second-quarter 2026, up 35% year over year, while products grew 42% to 24.4 million. Moreover, 51% of new products came from existing members. The cross-buy trend supports higher lifetime value without requiring the same acquisition spending for every new service.
SoFi Plus strengthens that argument. The paid membership passed 200,000 subscribers, and many members added another product afterward. SoFi can increasingly turn checking, investing, credit and lending into one relationship. Compared with Nu, whose scale is already massive, SoFi has more room to deepen a much smaller member base.
The revenue mix is also improving. Fee-based revenues represented 39% of second-quarter adjusted net revenues, while the loan platform business, interchange, brokerage and technology services expanded the ways SoFi can earn without relying solely on balance sheet lending. This diversification could make growth more durable and capital efficient over time.
Recent product expansion adds another layer. SoFi expanded private-market access through funds from CAZ Investments and AngelList, while its Payward partnership connects Big Business Banking, the SoFi Exchange Network and SoFiUSD with Kraken. These initiatives could strengthen investing, payments and enterprise relationships if adoption develops as planned.
Execution still matters, especially in credit and technology services. Yet the combination of accelerating cross-buy, stronger fee generation, new enterprise capabilities and a broad U.S. product set gives SoFi the more compelling growth setup versus Nu.
The Case for NU
Nu remains a digital banking operator, with a customer base that reached 139 million in second-quarter 2026 across Brazil, Mexico and Colombia. Its activity rate rose to 83.5%, showing that scale has not come at the expense of engagement. Nu’s ability to serve a large population at low cost remains difficult to match.
Monetization is also improving. Average revenue per active customer reached $17, while Nu generated more than $1 billion in quarterly net income for the first time. Its efficiency ratio stayed near 20%, giving Nu a clear profitability advantage over SoFi. Still, Nu’s larger base means future growth increasingly depends on getting more value from existing relationships rather than simply adding customers.
Mexico offers upside. Nu has more than 16 million customers there and received a banking license, which should support payroll deposits, broader credit products and deeper primary-account relationships. Brazil also offers room through Croma, higher-income products and small-business banking. These initiatives can sustain growth but require disciplined execution.
Nu’s AI platform, NuFormer, is an asset. It supports underwriting, customer service and marketing, and AI agents now handle more than 60% of support conversations in Brazil. Compared with SoFi, Nu appears further along in applying AI directly to core banking operations.
The main restraint is risk concentration. Nu remains heavily exposed to Latin American consumer credit, and 90-plus-day delinquencies reached 6.9% in the second quarter. Its planned U.S. expansion will also take time to build local underwriting data. Nu remains attractive operationally, but its path looks less diversified than SoFi’s.
How Do Estimates Compare for SOFI & NU?
The Zacks Consensus Estimate for SoFi’s 2026 and 2027 sales implies year-over-year growth of 35.52% and 20.16%, respectively. Over the past 60 days, estimates for SOFI’s 2026 and 2027 EPS have been revised marginally upward. However, the consensus mark for 2026 and 2027 EPS suggests a year-over-year increase of 53.85% and 34.86%, respectively.
For SoFi Technologies:
Image Source: Zacks Investment Research
The Zacks Consensus Estimate for Nu’s 2026 and 2027 sales implies year-over-year growth of 42.68% and 24.09%, respectively. The consensus mark for 2026 and 2027 EPS suggests a year-over-year increase of 38.71% and 35.12%, respectively. Over the past 60 days, estimates for Nu’s 2026 and 2027 EPS have been revised northward as well.
For Nu Holdings:
Image Source: Zacks Investment Research
Price Performance and Valuation of SOFI & NU
Over the past three months, SoFi shares have gained 4%, while Nu shares have rallied 24.1%. In comparison, the S&P 500 composite has advanced 2.4% in the same time frame.
Image Source: Zacks Investment Research
SOFI is trading at a forward 12-month price-to-sales of 4.05X, which is below its three-year median of 4.23X. Meanwhile, NU is presently trading at a forward 12-month price-to-sales of 2.77X, which is below its three-year median of 3.84X.
The gap means SoFi investors are paying more for expected profit growth, leaving less room for execution misses. Still, the premium also reflects a market expectation that SoFi can compound faster through member growth, cross-buying and a broader revenue mix. Nu’s lower multiple offers a valuation cushion, but its greater exposure to Latin American credit conditions deserves consideration. On valuation alone, Nu is cheaper, but on growth optionality, SoFi’s premium has a stronger case.
Image Source: Zacks Investment Research
Conclusion
SoFi and Nu both remain digital banking stories, but SoFi now offers the more attractive growth setup. Nu brings exceptional scale, efficiency and profitability, yet its expansion still depends heavily on Latin American credit, deeper customer monetization and careful execution in new markets. SoFi has a smaller base, but that creates more runway as cross-buy improves, fee-based businesses expand, and new banking, investing and digital-asset products widen the platform. The higher valuation adds risk, so neither stock looks one-sided. With both carrying a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold), SoFi appears to be the better stock to consider at this stage today. You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here.
Research Chief Names "Single Best Pick to Double"
From thousands of stocks, 5 Zacks experts each have chosen their favorite to skyrocket +100% or more in months to come. From those 5, Director of Research Sheraz Mian hand-picks one to have the most explosive upside of all.
This company targets millennial and Gen Z audiences, generating nearly $1 billion in revenue last quarter alone. A recent pullback makes now an ideal time to jump aboard. Of course, all our elite picks aren’t winners but this one could far surpass earlier Zacks’ Stocks Set to Double like Nano-X Imaging which shot up +129.6% in little more than 9 months.
Free: See Our Top Stock And 4 Runners UpWant the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report
Nu Holdings Ltd. (NU): Free Stock Analysis Report
SoFi Technologies, Inc. (SOFI): Free Stock Analysis Report
This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research (zacks.com).