AAPL vs HES Stock Comparison
AAPL currently leads HES in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 62 vs 54. The clearest difference is risk resilience.
What is the main difference between AAPL and HES?
AAPL leads the current stock comparison as Apple Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Apple Inc. vs Hess Corporation
AAPL leads
AAPL leads by 8 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Value. Wall Street currently favors HES on target upside.
Competitive: 3 of 5 evidence groups support AAPL, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Apple Inc.
Hess Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors AAPL over HES, 62 versus 54 as of Oct 31, 2026. AAPL's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and value. Analyst target upside, however, currently favors HES. 3 of 5 covered evidence groups favor AAPL today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. AAPL lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 8 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Apple Inc. and Hess 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 AAPL and HES 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.
- Risk Resilience69 vs 57AAPL +12
- Value38 vs 32AAPL +6
- Quality80 vs 75AAPL +5
3 of 5 evidence groups favor AAPL. AAPL’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and value.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum -9
New signals
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session.
AAPL's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AAPL and HES both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
AAPL (Apple Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and value.
HES (Hess Corporation): the counter-case, on fundamentals, 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
AAPLAAPL on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
HESHES on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
AAPLAAPL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 6 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
AAPLAAPL on Risk Resilience, by 12 points.
Analyst upside
HESHES on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors AAPL, analyst targets favor HES. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | AAPL | HES | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -1.7% | +4% | HES has more room |
| Target dispersion | +45.7% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 19 | 1 | 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 | AAPL | HES |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 4.99% | 0.00% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $0.808 | $1.000 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $1.030 | $1.000 |
| Years increased | 5 | 3 |
| No cut in window | Yes | No (1) |
| Cohort rank | #254 | not ranked |
AAPL grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 4.99% a year against HES's 0.00%. AAPL never reduced its regular dividend in the window; HES did in 1 year. They are ranked in different cohorts — US dividend-paying corporations and variable-dividend payers — so their ranks are not comparable with each other.
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
3 of 5 covered evidence groups favor AAPL. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | AAPL | 62 vs 54 |
| Fundamentals | HESon balance | revenue growth -1.6% vs 26.1%; EPS growth 1% vs 2.8%; TTM ROE 137.2% vs 27.4%; gross margin 48.7% vs 78.9%; operating margin 33.2% vs 37% — HES takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | AAPL | Value 38 vs 32 |
| Technicals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Risk Resilience | AAPL | Risk Resilience 69 vs 57 |
| Analyst expectations | HES | Target upside -1.7% vs 4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AAPL and HES and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is moderate at 8 points.
- 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 AAPL.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28AAPL lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 8 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- AAPL +8
- 62 vs 54
- 7 sessions ago
- AAPL +11
- 65 vs 54
- 30 sessions ago
- AAPL +6
- 60 vs 54
- 90 sessions ago
- AAPL +16
- 61 vs 45
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
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 AAPL
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (12.19%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (1.3%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
No active signals
No signal that the other name lacks.
AAPL 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 down over the latest session (price -1.23%, AIQ -2 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.
- 1HES closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 12 points behind, the largest single contributor to AAPL's edge.
- 2HES generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3AAPL'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
HES leads on balance| Metric | AAPL | HES |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -1.6% | 26.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 1% | 2.8% |
| Gross margin | 48.7% | 78.9% |
| Operating margin | 33.2% | 37% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 137.2% | 27.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.78 | 0.84 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | AAPL | HES |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0% | — |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 3.2% | — |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 3.1% | — |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 27.3% | — |
| Year to date | 26.5% | — |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 30.8% | — |
Technicals
Split| Metric | AAPL | HES |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 54.7 | — |
| ADX (14) | 19.9 | — |
| Price vs 50-day | 3.9% | — |
| Price vs 200-day | 16.3% | — |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 13.6% | — |
Risk
AAPL is the more resilient| Metric | AAPL | HES |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.56 | — |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.98 | — |
| Sortino ratio | 1.32 | — |
| Max drawdown | -13.8% | — |
| Current drawdown | -1.3% | — |
| Annualized volatility | 24% | — |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2% | — |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AAPL or HES?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, AAPL is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 62 against HES's 54. The edge comes from risk resilience and value. 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 AAPL or HES the better buy right now?
AAPL carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 3 of 5 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor AAPL over HES?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. AAPL leads Risk Resilience by 12 points; AAPL leads Value by 6 points; AAPL leads Quality by 5 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AAPL or HES?
Analyst price targets imply -1.7% upside for AAPL and +4% for HES, so the Street currently favors HES. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors AAPL. 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, AAPL or HES?
AAPL is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. AAPL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 6 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, AAPL or HES?
HES 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, AAPL or HES?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, AAPL or HES?
AAPL is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. AAPL on Risk Resilience, by 12 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 AAPL more profitable than HES?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 48.7% vs 78.9%; operating margin 33.2% vs 37%; ttm roe 137.2% vs 27.4%. AAPL leads on one measure and HES on two measures, 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 AAPL's lead over HES getting stronger or weaker?
AAPL lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 8 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the AAPL vs HES verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: HES closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 12 points behind, the largest single contributor to AAPL's edge; HES generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover; AAPL'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 AAPL and HES?
AAPL: 4 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. HES: No active signals. 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 AAPL is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare AAPL and HES 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.