ABT vs BDX Stock Comparison
Compare ABT and BDX across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between ABT and BDX?
BDX leads the current stock comparison as Becton, Dickinson and Company, with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Abbott Laboratories vs Becton, Dickinson and Company
BDX leads
BDX leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from ABT. Wall Street currently favors ABT on target upside.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support BDX, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Abbott Laboratories
Becton, Dickinson and Company
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors BDX over ABT, 48 versus 45 as of Sep 11, 2026. BDX's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while ABT holds the stronger quality profile. BDX also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors ABT. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BDX today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. BDX lead: Reversed — ABT led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; BDX now leads by 3.
Compare Abbott Laboratories and Becton, Dickinson and Company 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 ABT and BDX 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.
- Momentum20 vs 37BDX +17
- Value48 vs 63BDX +15
- Quality57 vs 44ABT +13
- Risk Resilience57 vs 46ABT +11
2 of 6 evidence groups favor BDX. BDX’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; ABT 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 -14
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -3
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
BDX's lead widened by 3 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ABT and BDX both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
BDX (Becton, Dickinson and Company): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
ABT (Abbott Laboratories): the counter-case, on quality, risk resilience, fundamentals.
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
BDXBDX on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
BDXBDX on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
BDXBDX on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 points.
Momentum
BDXBDX on the Momentum factor, by 17 points.
Lower downside
ABTABT on Risk Resilience, by 11 points.
Analyst upside
ABTABT on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors BDX, analyst targets favor ABT. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | ABT | BDX | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +18.1% | +4% | ABT has more room |
| Target dispersion | +42.4% | +27.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 10 | 8 | 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
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BDX. 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 | 45 vs 48 |
| Fundamentals | ABTon balance | revenue growth 12.8% vs 5.7%; EPS growth -14.5% vs 223.4%; TTM ROE 10.5% vs 3.8%; gross margin 56.8% vs 46.1%; operating margin 17% vs 9.8% — ABT takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | BDX | Value 48 vs 63 |
| Technicals | BDX | Price vs 50-day -3% vs 3.7%; vs 200-day -2.5% vs 2.9% |
| Risk Resilience | ABT | Risk Resilience 57 vs 46 |
| Analyst expectations | ABT | Target upside 18.1% vs 4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ABT and BDX 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 already changed hands inside the comparison window. (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 BDX.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10BDX lead: Reversed — ABT led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; BDX now leads by 3.
- Today
- BDX +3
- 45 vs 48
- 7 sessions ago
- BDX +2
- 53 vs 55
- 30 sessions ago
- ABT +1
- 60 vs 59
- 90 sessions ago
- ABT +2
- 58 vs 56
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Aug 27 when BDX moved ahead of ABT.
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.
2 bullish / 4 bearish, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.83%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
3 bullish / 3 bearish, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.04%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
BDX 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 -1.36%, AIQ -4 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.81%, 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.
- 1ABT closes the Momentum gap — currently 17 points behind, the largest single contributor to BDX's edge.
- 2ABT's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3BDX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 3 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
ABT leads on balance| Metric | ABT | BDX |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 12.8% | 5.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -14.5% | 223.4% |
| Gross margin | 56.8% | 46.1% |
| Operating margin | 17% | 9.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 10.5% | 3.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.64 | 0.69 |
Performance
BDX leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | ABT | BDX |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -6.4% | -5.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -6.8% | -3.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 15.9% | 19.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -6.2% | 8.1% |
| Year to date | -17.5% | -9.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -21.8% | -7.9% |
Technicals
BDX has the stronger structure| Metric | ABT | BDX |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 23.9 | 28.5 |
| ADX (14) | 24.3 | 39.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | -3% | 3.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | -2.5% | 2.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 22.6% | 23.1% |
Risk
ABT is the more resilient| Metric | ABT | BDX |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.04 | 0.39 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.92 | -0.22 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.33 | -0.27 |
| Max drawdown | -39.6% | -33% |
| Current drawdown | -24.3% | -16% |
| Annualized volatility | 27.1% | 30.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.3% | -2.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ABT or BDX?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, BDX is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 48 against ABT's 45. The edge comes from momentum and value. ABT 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 ABT or BDX the better buy right now?
BDX carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 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 BDX over ABT?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. BDX leads Momentum by 17 points; BDX leads Value by 15 points; ABT leads Quality by 13 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ABT or BDX?
Analyst price targets imply +18.1% upside for ABT and +4% for BDX, so the Street currently favors ABT. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors BDX. 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, ABT or BDX?
BDX is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. BDX on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 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, ABT or BDX?
BDX 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, ABT or BDX?
BDX on the Momentum factor, by 17 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, ABT or BDX?
ABT is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ABT on Risk Resilience, by 11 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 ABT more profitable than BDX?
ABT leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 56.8% vs 46.1%; operating margin 17% vs 9.8%; ttm roe 10.5% vs 3.8%.
Is BDX's lead over ABT getting stronger or weaker?
BDX lead: Reversed — ABT led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; BDX now leads by 3. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-27, when BDX moved ahead of ABT.
What would change the ABT vs BDX verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ABT closes the Momentum gap — currently 17 points behind, the largest single contributor to BDX's edge; ABT's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; BDX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 3 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 ABT and BDX?
ABT: 2 bullish / 4 bearish, conflicted. BDX: 3 bullish / 3 bearish, 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 ABT is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On BDX it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare ABT and BDX 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.