ADT vs CPRT Stock Comparison
Compare ADT and CPRT across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between ADT and CPRT?
CPRT leads the current stock comparison as Copart, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
ADT Inc. vs Copart, Inc.
CPRT leads
CPRT leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, but the lead has narrowed from 8 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support CPRT, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CPRT over ADT, 54 versus 49 as of Sep 11, 2026. CPRT's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while ADT holds the stronger value profile. CPRT also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CPRT today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. CPRT lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 5 points over 30 sessions.
Compare ADT Inc. and Copart, 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 ADT and CPRT 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.
- Quality40 vs 67CPRT +27
- Value73 vs 48ADT +25
- Momentum26 vs 37CPRT +11
- Risk Resilience55 vs 66CPRT +11
4 of 6 evidence groups favor CPRT. CPRT’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; ADT keeps a meaningful value 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 -1
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -6
New signals
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.63%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
CPRT's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ADT and CPRT both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CPRT (Copart, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
ADT (ADT Inc.): the counter-case, on value, valuation, technicals.
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
CPRTCPRT on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CPRTCPRT on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
ADTADT on the peer-relative Value factor, by 25 points.
Momentum
CPRTCPRT on the Momentum factor, by 11 points.
Lower downside
CPRTCPRT on Risk Resilience, by 11 points.
Analyst upside
CPRTCPRT 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 | ADT | CPRT | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +8.1% | +13.5% | CPRT has more room |
| Target dispersion | +3.3% | +58.8% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 2 | 3 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CPRT. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | CPRT | 49 vs 54 |
| Fundamentals | CPRTon balance | revenue growth 2.6% vs 10.3%; EPS growth -4.8% vs 19.4%; TTM ROE 16.8% vs 16.6%; gross margin 51.4% vs 45.5%; operating margin 25% vs 36.6% — CPRT takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | ADT | Value 73 vs 48 |
| Technicals | ADT | Price vs 50-day -2.5% vs -1%; vs 200-day -4.2% vs -10.4% |
| Risk Resilience | CPRT | Risk Resilience 55 vs 66 |
| Analyst expectations | CPRT | Target upside 8.1% vs 13.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ADT and CPRT 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 5 points. (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 CPRT.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10CPRT lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 5 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- CPRT +5
- 49 vs 54
- 7 sessions ago
- ADT +1
- 62 vs 61
- 30 sessions ago
- CPRT +8
- 56 vs 64
- 90 sessions ago
- ADT +2
- 57 vs 55
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Sep 8 when CPRT moved ahead of ADT.
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 / 4 bearish, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (1.18%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (13.40%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
CPRT 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 +0.57%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -2.6%, 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.
- 1ADT closes the Quality gap — currently 27 points behind, the largest single contributor to CPRT's edge.
- 2ADT's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3CPRT's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 5-point move would eliminate CPRT'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
CPRT leads on balance| Metric | ADT | CPRT |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 2.6% | 10.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -4.8% | 19.4% |
| Gross margin | 51.4% | 45.5% |
| Operating margin | 25% | 36.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 16.8% | 16.6% |
| Debt to equity | 2.21 | 0.01 |
Performance
ADT leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | ADT | CPRT |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -6.4% | -4.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -4.1% | 6.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 4.6% | -1.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 6.9% | -13.5% |
| Year to date | -13.1% | -21.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -18.7% | -36.9% |
Technicals
ADT has the stronger structure| Metric | ADT | CPRT |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 31.6 | 26.1 |
| ADX (14) | 19.7 | 26.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -2.5% | -1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -4.2% | -10.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 26.3% | 48.4% |
Risk
CPRT is the more resilient| Metric | ADT | CPRT |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.8 | 0.18 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.72 | -1.46 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.83 | -2.05 |
| Max drawdown | -28.8% | -44.4% |
| Current drawdown | -20.8% | -37.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 28.2% | 30.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.8% | -3.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ADT or CPRT?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CPRT is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 54 against ADT's 49. The edge comes from quality and momentum. ADT is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 ADT or CPRT the better buy right now?
CPRT carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor CPRT over ADT?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CPRT leads Quality by 27 points; ADT leads Value by 25 points; CPRT leads Momentum by 11 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ADT or CPRT?
Analyst price targets imply +8.1% upside for ADT and +13.5% for CPRT, so the Street currently favors CPRT. 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, ADT or CPRT?
ADT is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. ADT on the peer-relative Value factor, by 25 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, ADT or CPRT?
CPRT 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, ADT or CPRT?
CPRT on the Momentum factor, by 11 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, ADT or CPRT?
CPRT is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CPRT 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 ADT more profitable than CPRT?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 51.4% vs 45.5%; operating margin 25% vs 36.6%; ttm roe 16.8% vs 16.6%. Each name leads on one measure, 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 CPRT's lead over ADT getting stronger or weaker?
CPRT lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 5 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 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-08, when CPRT moved ahead of ADT.
What would change the ADT vs CPRT verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ADT closes the Quality gap — currently 27 points behind, the largest single contributor to CPRT's edge; ADT's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; CPRT's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 5-point move would eliminate CPRT's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about ADT and CPRT?
ADT: 1 bullish / 4 bearish, conflicted. CPRT: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 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 ADT is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On CPRT it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare ADT and CPRT 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.