ADPT vs CHGG Stock Comparison
Compare ADPT and CHGG across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between ADPT and CHGG?
CHGG leads the current stock comparison as Chegg, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Adaptive Biotechnologies Corporation vs Chegg, Inc.
CHGG leads
CHGG leads by 11 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, and the lead has widened from 4 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support CHGG, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Adaptive Biotechnologies Corporation
Chegg, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CHGG over ADPT, 50 versus 39 as of Sep 6, 2026. CHGG's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while ADPT holds the stronger risk resilience profile. CHGG also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CHGG today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. CHGG lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 11 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Adaptive Biotechnologies Corporation and Chegg, 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 ADPT and CHGG 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.
- Value30%34 vs 65CHGG +31
- Quality30%30 vs 50CHGG +20
- Risk Resilience15%35 vs 25ADPT +10
- Momentum25%57 vs 49ADPT +8
3 of 6 evidence groups favor CHGG. CHGG’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; ADPT keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-05, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-04.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
CHGG's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ADPT and CHGG both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CHGG (Chegg, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
ADPT (Adaptive Biotechnologies Corporation): the counter-case, on risk resilience, momentum, fundamentals.
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
CHGGCHGG on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
CHGGCHGG on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CHGGCHGG on the peer-relative Value factor, by 31 points.
Momentum
ADPTADPT on the Momentum factor, by 8 points.
Lower downside
ADPTADPT on Risk Resilience, by 10 points.
Analyst upside
CHGGCHGG 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 | ADPT | CHGG | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -1.6% | +76.2% | CHGG has more room |
| Target dispersion | +31.4% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 4 | 1 | 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 CHGG. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | CHGG | 39 vs 50 |
| Fundamentals | ADPTon balance | EPS growth -92.3% vs -16%; TTM ROE -32.6% vs -41.9%; gross margin 75.4% vs 58.7% — ADPT takes 2 of 3 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | CHGG | Value 34 vs 65 |
| Technicals | ADPT | Price vs 50-day 3.5% vs -5.3%; vs 200-day 37.3% vs -5.6% |
| Risk Resilience | ADPT | Risk Resilience 35 vs 25 |
| Analyst expectations | CHGG | Target upside -1.6% vs 76.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ADPT and CHGG 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 leader is throwing conflicting signals. (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)
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 CHGG.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 24 – Sep 5CHGG lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 11 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- CHGG +11
- 39 vs 50
- 7 sessions ago
- CHGG +11
- 38 vs 49
- 30 sessions ago
- CHGG +4
- 41 vs 45
- 90 sessions ago
- CHGG +6
- 42 vs 48
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.
3 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (32.69%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.37%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (9.62%)
CHGG 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 -1.18%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -13.03%, 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.
- 1ADPT closes the Value gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to CHGG's edge.
- 2ADPT's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3CHGG's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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
ADPT leads on balance| Metric | ADPT | CHGG |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 1% | -18% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -92.3% | -16% |
| Gross margin | 75.4% | 58.7% |
| Operating margin | -12.2% | -0.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -32.6% | -41.9% |
| Debt to equity | 2.87 | 0.43 |
Performance
ADPT leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | ADPT | CHGG |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -3.6% | 0.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -2.6% | -7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 43.7% | -27.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 63.4% | 36.2% |
| Year to date | 49.5% | -8.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 88.9% | -45.1% |
Technicals
ADPT has the stronger structure| Metric | ADPT | CHGG |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 46 | 58.2 |
| ADX (14) | 23.5 | 21.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | 3.5% | -5.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | 37.3% | -5.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 33.6% | 100.1% |
Risk
ADPT is the more resilient| Metric | ADPT | CHGG |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.84 | 2.61 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.19 | -0.12 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.9 | -0.22 |
| Max drawdown | -39.4% | -75.5% |
| Current drawdown | -8.2% | -53.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 69.3% | 110% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6% | -10.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ADPT or CHGG?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CHGG is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 50 against ADPT's 39. The edge comes from value and quality. ADPT 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 ADPT or CHGG the better buy right now?
CHGG carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 6, 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 CHGG over ADPT?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. CHGG leads Value by 31 points; CHGG leads Quality by 20 points; ADPT leads Risk Resilience by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ADPT or CHGG?
Analyst price targets imply -1.6% upside for ADPT and +76.2% for CHGG, so the Street currently favors CHGG. 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, ADPT or CHGG?
CHGG is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CHGG on the peer-relative Value factor, by 31 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, ADPT or CHGG?
CHGG 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, ADPT or CHGG?
ADPT on the Momentum factor, by 8 points. Momentum carries 25% of 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, ADPT or CHGG?
ADPT is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ADPT on Risk Resilience, by 10 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is ADPT more profitable than CHGG?
ADPT leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 75.4% vs 58.7%; operating margin -12.2% vs -0.8%; ttm roe -32.6% vs -41.9%.
Is CHGG's lead over ADPT getting stronger or weaker?
CHGG lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 11 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-24 and 2026-09-05. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the ADPT vs CHGG verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ADPT closes the Value gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to CHGG's edge; ADPT's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; CHGG's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about ADPT and CHGG?
ADPT: 3 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. CHGG: 1 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 ADPT is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On CHGG it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare ADPT and CHGG with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.