ACN vs ANET Stock Comparison
Compare ACN and ANET across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between ACN and ANET?
ACN leads the current stock comparison as Accenture plc, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Accenture plc vs Arista Networks, Inc.
ACN leads
ACN leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Value, but the lead has narrowed from 8 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors ANET on target upside.
Fragile: 1 of 6 evidence groups support ACN, and its lead is narrowing.
Accenture plc
Arista Networks, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ACN over ANET, 61 versus 58 as of Sep 11, 2026. ACN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value, while ANET holds the stronger quality profile. ACN also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors ANET. 1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ACN today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. ACN lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 3 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Accenture plc and Arista Networks, 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 ACN and ANET 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.
- Value72 vs 26ACN +46
- Quality65 vs 89ANET +24
- Momentum45 vs 62ANET +17
- Risk Resilience55 vs 55Even
1 of 6 evidence groups favor ACN. ACN’s edge is concentrated in value; ANET 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 +3
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience +3
No new signals fired.
ACN's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ACN and ANET both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ACN (Accenture plc): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value.
ANET (Arista Networks, Inc.): the counter-case, on quality, momentum, 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
ACNACN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
ACNACN on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
ACNACN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 46 points.
Momentum
ANETANET on the Momentum factor, by 17 points.
Lower downside
ACNACN carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
ANETANET on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors ACN, analyst targets favor ANET. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | ACN | ANET | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +6% | +7.5% | ANET has more room |
| Target dispersion | +74.4% | +58.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 17 | 13 | 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
1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ACN. 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 | 61 vs 58 |
| Fundamentals | ANETon balance | revenue growth 3.7% vs 12.1%; EPS growth 29.1% vs 18.5%; TTM ROE 25% vs 30.8%; gross margin 32% vs 63%; operating margin 14.9% vs 43.1% — ANET takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | ACN | Value 72 vs 26 |
| Technicals | ANET | Price vs 50-day 11.6% vs 8.1%; vs 200-day -11.9% vs 23.5% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 55 vs 55 |
| Analyst expectations | ANET | Target upside 6% vs 7.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ACN and ANET 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 1 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. (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 ACN.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10ACN lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 3 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- ACN +3
- 61 vs 58
- 7 sessions ago
- ACN +12
- 67 vs 55
- 30 sessions ago
- ACN +8
- 67 vs 59
- 90 sessions ago
- ANET +1
- 56 vs 57
The lead changed hands 7 times in this window, most recently on Jun 11 when ANET moved ahead of ACN.
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.
0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (22.55%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.77%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (20.69%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
ANET is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
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 +3.37%, AIQ +1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +5.61%, 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.
- 1ANET closes the Value gap — currently 46 points behind, the largest single contributor to ACN's edge.
- 2ANET generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3ACN starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 5 points over 30 sessions, and a further 3-point move would eliminate ACN'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
ANET leads on balance| Metric | ACN | ANET |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 3.7% | 12.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 29.1% | 18.5% |
| Gross margin | 32% | 63% |
| Operating margin | 14.9% | 43.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 25% | 30.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.26 | 0 |
Performance
ANET leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | ACN | ANET |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -5.2% | 1.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -1.2% | -10.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 4.3% | 24.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -11.7% | 36.7% |
| Year to date | -33.7% | 44.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -30.4% | 35% |
Technicals
ANET has the stronger structure| Metric | ACN | ANET |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 46.3 | 55.1 |
| ADX (14) | 20.1 | 15.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | 11.6% | 8.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -11.9% | 23.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 40.6% | 41.1% |
Risk
Split| Metric | ACN | ANET |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.3 | 2.06 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.65 | 0.73 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.83 | 1.12 |
| Max drawdown | -56.9% | -28.3% |
| Current drawdown | -38.3% | -10.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 44.5% | 54.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.2% | -4.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ACN or ANET?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ACN is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 61 against ANET's 58. The edge comes from value. ANET 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 ACN or ANET the better buy right now?
ACN carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 1 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 ACN over ANET?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. ACN leads Value by 46 points; ANET leads Quality by 24 points; ANET leads Momentum by 17 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ACN or ANET?
Analyst price targets imply +6% upside for ACN and +7.5% for ANET, so the Street currently favors ANET. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors ACN. 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, ACN or ANET?
ACN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. ACN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 46 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, ACN or ANET?
ACN 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, ACN or ANET?
ANET 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, ACN or ANET?
ACN is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ACN 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 ACN more profitable than ANET?
ANET leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 32% vs 63%; operating margin 14.9% vs 43.1%; ttm roe 25% vs 30.8%.
Is ACN's lead over ANET getting stronger or weaker?
ACN 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 7 times in that window, most recently on 2026-06-11, when ANET moved ahead of ACN.
What would change the ACN vs ANET verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ANET closes the Value gap — currently 46 points behind, the largest single contributor to ACN's edge; ANET generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover; ACN starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 5 points over 30 sessions, and a further 3-point move would eliminate ACN's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about ACN and ANET?
ACN: 0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral. ANET: 3 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 ACN is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On ANET it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare ACN and ANET 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.