A vs DHR Stock Comparison
A currently leads DHR in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 56 vs 53. The clearest difference is quality, while DHR has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between A and DHR?
A leads the current stock comparison as Agilent Technologies, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Agilent Technologies, Inc. vs Danaher Corporation
A leads
A leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Quality. Wall Street currently favors DHR on target upside.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support A, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Agilent Technologies, Inc.
Danaher Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors A over DHR, 56 versus 53 as of Oct 21, 2026. A's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while DHR holds the stronger momentum profile. A also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors DHR. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor A today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. A lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 3 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Agilent Technologies, Inc. and Danaher Corporation across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare A and DHR against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
AIQ Factor Divergence
Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.
- Quality67 vs 56A +11
- Momentum61 vs 65DHR +4
- Risk Resilience64 vs 61Even
- Value37 vs 37Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor A. A’s edge is concentrated in quality; DHR keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +9
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +3
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
A's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — A and DHR both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
A (Agilent Technologies, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
DHR (Danaher Corporation): the counter-case, on momentum, analyst expectations.
The AIQ Score and Wall Street therefore point in different directions on this pair.
Which one fits your objective
The same two names rank differently depending on what you are optimizing for. All six reads are shown at once — none of them is hidden behind a toggle.
Balanced
AA on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
AA on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
DHRDHR on the Momentum factor, by 4 points.
Lower downside
AA carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
DHRDHR on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors A, analyst targets favor DHR. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | A | DHR | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -5% | -4% | DHR has more room |
| Target dispersion | +27.8% | +24.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 13 | 10 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
The two are measuring different things. The AIQ Score reads current fundamentals, valuation, trend and risk; analyst targets price forward expectations. A divergence of this kind is either a contrarian opportunity or a sign the model is missing something already priced in — it is worth resolving before acting on either.
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | A | DHR |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 6.62% | 12.20% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $0.540 | $0.720 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $0.744 | $1.280 |
| Years increased | 3 | 5 |
| No cut in window | No (2) | Yes |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | #60 |
DHR grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 12.20% a year against A's 6.62%. DHR never reduced its regular dividend in the window; A did in 2 years.
Yield and payout ratio shown elsewhere on this page are current values, not part of the study window.
Split-adjusted regular dividends per share, 2020–2025, excluding special dividends. Research as of Sep 19, 2026.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor A. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 56 vs 53 |
| Fundamentals | Aon balance | revenue growth 2.3% vs 5.3%; EPS growth 6.7% vs -15.2%; TTM ROE 20.5% vs 7.7%; gross margin 53.7% vs 58.5%; operating margin 22.2% vs 20.4% — A takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 37 vs 37 |
| Technicals | A | Price vs 50-day 11.2% vs 9%; vs 200-day 28.3% vs 11.4% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 64 vs 61 |
| Analyst expectations | DHR | Target upside -5% vs -4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of A and DHR and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on A.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20A lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 3 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- A +3
- 56 vs 53
- 7 sessions ago
- A +3
- 57 vs 54
- 30 sessions ago
- A +3
- 61 vs 58
- 90 sessions ago
- A +11
- 61 vs 50
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Jun 25 when A moved ahead of DHR.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
4 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only A
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (1.5%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
4 bullish / 0 bearish
Only DHR
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish, Uptrend Structure Active.
A leads the comparison while carrying a conflicted signal state, which is one reason the stability rating is not higher.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +2.74%, AIQ +2 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +4.29%, AIQ +1 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1DHR closes the Quality gap — currently 11 points behind, the largest single contributor to A's edge.
- 2DHR's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed.
- 3A's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Fundamentals
A leads on balance| Metric | A | DHR |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 2.3% | 5.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 6.7% | -15.2% |
| Gross margin | 53.7% | 58.5% |
| Operating margin | 22.2% | 20.4% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 20.5% | 7.7% |
| Debt to equity | 0.54 | 0.51 |
Performance
A leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | A | DHR |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.8% | 0.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 3.4% | 1.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 29.6% | 25.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 41.7% | 15.3% |
| Year to date | 27.1% | -2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 22.6% | 6.3% |
Technicals
A has the stronger structure| Metric | A | DHR |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 51.2 | 52.7 |
| ADX (14) | 37.1 | 29.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | 11.2% | 9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 28.3% | 11.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 27.4% | 29.2% |
Risk
Split| Metric | A | DHR |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.82 | 0.4 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.65 | 0.25 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.24 | 0.36 |
| Max drawdown | -29.9% | -33.1% |
| Current drawdown | -1.4% | -7.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 32.4% | 30.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.9% | -2.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, A or DHR?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, A is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 56 against DHR's 53. The edge comes from quality. DHR is not without a case — it holds the better momentum profile, which matters more if that is the objective you are optimizing for. This is a systematic score, not a recommendation: it ranks the two on the same evidence, it does not know your holding period or tax position.
Is A or DHR the better buy right now?
A carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor A over DHR?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. A leads Quality by 11 points; DHR leads Momentum by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, A or DHR?
Analyst price targets imply -5% upside for A and -4% for DHR, so the Street currently favors DHR. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors A. The two are measuring different things: the model reads current fundamentals, valuation, trend and risk; the Street is pricing forward expectations. A divergence of this kind is either a contrarian opportunity or a sign the model is missing something the analysts have already priced — it is the single most useful row on this page to investigate. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, A or DHR?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. The Value factor reads valuation relative to sector peers and to the company's own fundamental quality, so it is not the same as simply having the lower multiple.
Which has stronger growth, A or DHR?
A on combined revenue and EPS growth. Growth here is measured on reported revenue and earnings, not on forward estimates — it describes what the businesses have delivered, not what the Street expects next.
Which has stronger momentum, A or DHR?
DHR on the Momentum factor, by 4 points. Momentum is one of the four weighted factors in the AIQ composite. It has documented persistence over three- to twelve-month horizons, which makes it a timing input rather than a reason to hold something indefinitely.
Which is riskier, A or DHR?
A is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. A carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is A more profitable than DHR?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 53.7% vs 58.5%; operating margin 22.2% vs 20.4%; ttm roe 20.5% vs 7.7%. A leads on two measures and DHR on one measure, and there is no single profitability composite that resolves the split — which of the two reads as "more profitable" depends on whether you weight pricing power or operating leverage.
Is A's lead over DHR getting stronger or weaker?
A lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 3 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-06-25, when A moved ahead of DHR.
What would change the A vs DHR verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: DHR closes the Quality gap — currently 11 points behind, the largest single contributor to A's edge; DHR's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed; a's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about A and DHR?
A: 4 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. DHR: 4 bullish / 0 bearish. A conflicted state means bullish and bearish rules are active on the same name at once — the technical evidence is not pointing one way, and a decision taken on it carries more timing risk. The most decision-relevant rule on A is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On DHR it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare A and DHR with others
Continue your research
This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.