AA vs TX Stock Comparison
Compare AA and TX across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between AA and TX?
TX leads the current stock comparison as Ternium S.A., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Alcoa Corporation vs Ternium S.A.
TX leads
TX leads by 11 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, and the lead has widened from 3 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors AA on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support TX, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Alcoa Corporation
Ternium S.A.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TX over AA, 63 versus 52 as of Sep 11, 2026. TX's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience, while AA holds the stronger quality profile. TX also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors AA. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TX today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. TX lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 11 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Alcoa Corporation and Ternium S.A. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price-return comparison using available daily close history.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000
Based on available close-price history. Distribution reinvestment is not added unless already reflected in the source series.
Compare AA and TX 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.
- Momentum36 vs 78TX +42
- Risk Resilience40 vs 76TX +36
- Quality53 vs 40AA +13
- Value71 vs 67AA +4
3 of 6 evidence groups favor TX. TX’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience; AA keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Momentum -17
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -1
New signals
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
TX's lead widened by 5 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AA and TX both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TX (Ternium S.A.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.
AA (Alcoa Corporation): the counter-case, on quality, value, fundamentals — but at materially higher volatility, 45.7% against 18.7%.
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
TXTX on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
TXTX on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
AAAA on the peer-relative Value factor, by 4 points.
Momentum
TXTX on the Momentum factor, by 42 points.
Lower downside
TXTX on Risk Resilience, by 36 points.
Analyst upside
AAAA on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors TX, analyst targets favor AA. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | AA | TX | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +46% | -7.6% | AA has more room |
| Target dispersion | +38.3% | +54.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 6 | 6 | 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.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TX. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | TX | 52 vs 63 |
| Fundamentals | AAon balance | revenue growth 24.2% vs 10.3%; EPS growth -4.3% vs 63.6%; TTM ROE 19.2% vs 5.8%; gross margin 18.8% vs 17.4%; operating margin 8% vs 7.5% — AA takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | AA | Value 71 vs 67 |
| Technicals | TX | Price vs 50-day -0.6% vs 14.3%; vs 200-day -16.5% vs 29.9% |
| Risk Resilience | TX | Risk Resilience 40 vs 76 |
| Analyst expectations | AA | Target upside 46% vs -7.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AA and TX 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 moderate at 11 points.
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 TX.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10TX lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 11 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TX +11
- 52 vs 63
- 7 sessions ago
- TX +7
- 56 vs 63
- 30 sessions ago
- TX +3
- 59 vs 62
- 90 sessions ago
- TX +4
- 46 vs 50
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on May 21 when AA moved ahead of TX.
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.
1 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (19.19%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
4 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (14.20%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
TX 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.08%, AIQ -5 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.5%, AIQ 0 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.
- 1AA closes the Momentum gap — currently 42 points behind, the largest single contributor to TX's edge.
- 2AA's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3TX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 2 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
AA leads on balance| Metric | AA | TX |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 24.2% | 10.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -4.3% | 63.6% |
| Gross margin | 18.8% | 17.4% |
| Operating margin | 8% | 7.5% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 19.2% | 5.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.3 | 0.24 |
Performance
TX leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | AA | TX |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -5.4% | 1.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -5.7% | 5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -26.3% | 22% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -27.2% | 44.3% |
| Year to date | -9.1% | 50.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 50.7% | 67.9% |
Technicals
TX has the stronger structure| Metric | AA | TX |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 43.5 | 73.5 |
| ADX (14) | 13.4 | 48.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -0.6% | 14.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | -16.5% | 29.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 45.7% | 18.7% |
Risk
TX is the more resilient| Metric | AA | TX |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.71 | 1.07 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.99 | 1.75 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.68 | 2.96 |
| Max drawdown | -48.8% | -18.9% |
| Current drawdown | -42.4% | -0.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 56.3% | 31.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.4% | -3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AA or TX?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TX is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 63 against AA's 52. The edge comes from momentum and risk resilience. AA is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 AA or TX the better buy right now?
TX carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor TX over AA?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. TX leads Momentum by 42 points; TX leads Risk Resilience by 36 points; AA leads Quality by 13 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AA or TX?
Analyst price targets imply +46% upside for AA and -7.6% for TX, so the Street currently favors AA. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors TX. 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, AA or TX?
AA is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. AA on the peer-relative Value factor, by 4 points. 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, AA or TX?
TX 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, AA or TX?
TX on the Momentum factor, by 42 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, AA or TX?
TX is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TX on Risk Resilience, by 36 points. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is AA more profitable than TX?
AA leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 18.8% vs 17.4%; operating margin 8% vs 7.5%; ttm roe 19.2% vs 5.8%.
Is TX's lead over AA getting stronger or weaker?
TX lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 11 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-05-21, when AA moved ahead of TX.
What would change the AA vs TX verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: AA closes the Momentum gap — currently 42 points behind, the largest single contributor to TX's edge; AA's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; TX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 2 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 AA and TX?
AA: 1 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. TX: 4 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. 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 AA is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On TX it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare AA and TX 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.