ACGL vs AIG Stock Comparison
Compare ACGL and AIG across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between ACGL and AIG?
ACGL leads the current stock comparison as Arch Capital Group Ltd., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Arch Capital Group Ltd. vs American International Group, Inc.
ACGL leads
ACGL leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 8 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support ACGL, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Arch Capital Group Ltd.
American International Group, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ACGL over AIG, 57 versus 54 as of Sep 11, 2026. ACGL's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while AIG holds the stronger risk resilience profile. ACGL also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ACGL today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. ACGL lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 3 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Arch Capital Group Ltd. and American International Group, Inc. 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 ACGL and AIG 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.
- Quality68 vs 51ACGL +17
- Risk Resilience55 vs 67AIG +12
- Value63 vs 64Even
- Momentum37 vs 38Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor ACGL. ACGL’s edge is concentrated in quality; AIG keeps a meaningful risk resilience 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 +4
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
ACGL's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ACGL and AIG both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ACGL (Arch Capital Group Ltd.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
AIG (American International Group, Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience.
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
ACGLACGL on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
AIGAIG on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
AIGAIG on Risk Resilience, by 12 points.
Analyst upside
ACGLACGL on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | ACGL | AIG | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +17% | +15.3% | ACGL has more room |
| Target dispersion | +21.3% | +20.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 6 | 8 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ACGL. 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 | 57 vs 54 |
| Fundamentals | ACGLon balance | revenue growth 2.5% vs 6.5%; EPS growth 5.9% vs 26.1%; TTM ROE 19.5% vs 7.3%; gross margin 46.2% vs 38.1%; operating margin 27.4% vs 14% — ACGL takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 63 vs 64 |
| Technicals | ACGL | Price vs 50-day -3.9% vs -3.3%; vs 200-day 0% vs -3% |
| Risk Resilience | AIG | Risk Resilience 55 vs 67 |
| Analyst expectations | ACGL | Target upside 17% vs 15.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ACGL and AIG 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 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 ACGL.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10ACGL lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 3 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- ACGL +3
- 57 vs 54
- 7 sessions ago
- ACGL +4
- 60 vs 56
- 30 sessions ago
- ACGL +8
- 59 vs 51
- 90 sessions ago
- ACGL +4
- 68 vs 64
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Aug 6 when ACGL moved ahead of AIG.
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 / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (3.96%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.68%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
ACGL 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 is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.11%, AIQ +1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.4%, 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.
- 1AIG closes the Quality gap — currently 17 points behind, the largest single contributor to ACGL's edge.
- 2AIG's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3ACGL's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 5 points over 30 sessions, and a further 3-point move would eliminate ACGL's advantage entirely.
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
ACGL leads on balance| Metric | ACGL | AIG |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 2.5% | 6.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 5.9% | 26.1% |
| Gross margin | 46.2% | 38.1% |
| Operating margin | 27.4% | 14% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 19.5% | 7.3% |
| Debt to equity | 0.18 | 0.22 |
Performance
ACGL leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | ACGL | AIG |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2% | -1.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -1.1% | -1.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 5.4% | 0.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 1.5% | -3.8% |
| Year to date | 0.3% | -12.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 5.8% | -4.7% |
Technicals
ACGL has the stronger structure| Metric | ACGL | AIG |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 37.6 | 45.7 |
| ADX (14) | 12.2 | 16.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -3.9% | -3.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | 0% | -3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 17.9% | 14% |
Risk
AIG is the more resilient| Metric | ACGL | AIG |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.3 | 0.05 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.26 | -0.23 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.35 | -0.32 |
| Max drawdown | -14.1% | -17% |
| Current drawdown | -9.7% | -13.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 21.3% | 24.2% |
| 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, ACGL or AIG?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ACGL is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 57 against AIG's 54. The edge comes from quality. AIG is not without a case — it holds the better risk resilience 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 ACGL or AIG the better buy right now?
ACGL 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: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor ACGL over AIG?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. ACGL leads Quality by 17 points; AIG leads Risk Resilience by 12 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ACGL or AIG?
Analyst price targets imply +17% upside for ACGL and +15.3% for AIG, so the Street currently favors ACGL. The model and the Street agree here, which is a broader base of evidence than either alone. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, ACGL or AIG?
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, ACGL or AIG?
AIG 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, ACGL or AIG?
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, ACGL or AIG?
AIG is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. AIG 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 ACGL more profitable than AIG?
ACGL leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 46.2% vs 38.1%; operating margin 27.4% vs 14%; ttm roe 19.5% vs 7.3%.
Is ACGL's lead over AIG getting stronger or weaker?
ACGL lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 3 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 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-06, when ACGL moved ahead of AIG.
What would change the ACGL vs AIG verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: AIG closes the Quality gap — currently 17 points behind, the largest single contributor to ACGL's edge; AIG's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; ACGL's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 5 points over 30 sessions, and a further 3-point move would eliminate ACGL's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about ACGL and AIG?
ACGL: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. AIG: 1 bullish / 1 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 ACGL is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On AIG it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare ACGL and AIG 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.