Real-world tabular learning production scenarios typically involve evolving data streams, where data arrives continuously and its distribution may change over time. In such a setting, most studies in the literature regarding supervised learning favor the use of instance incremental algorithms due to their ability to adapt to changes in the data distribution. Another significant reason for choosing these algorithms is \textit{avoid storing observations in memory} as commonly done in batch incremental settings. However, the design of instance incremental algorithms often assumes immediate availability of labels, which is an optimistic assumption. In many real-world scenarios, such as fraud detection or credit scoring, labels may be delayed. Consequently, batch incremental algorithms are widely used in many real-world tasks. This raises an important question: "In delayed settings, is instance incremental learning the best option regarding predictive performance and computational efficiency?" Unfortunately, this question has not been studied in depth, probably due to the scarcity of real datasets containing delayed information. In this study, we conduct a comprehensive empirical evaluation and analysis of this question using a real-world fraud detection problem and commonly used generated datasets. Our findings indicate that instance incremental learning is not the superior option, considering on one side state-of-the-art models such as Adaptive Random Forest (ARF) and other side batch learning models such as XGBoost. Additionally, when considering the interpretability of the learning systems, batch incremental solutions tend to be favored. Code: \url{https://github.com/anselmeamekoe/DelayedLabelStream}