ADT vs TNET Stock Comparison
TNET currently leads ADT in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 62 vs 61. The clearest difference is quality, while ADT has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between ADT and TNET?
TNET leads the current stock comparison as TriNet Group, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
ADT Inc. vs TriNet Group, Inc.
TNET leads
TNET leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 6 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 1 of 6 evidence groups support TNET, its lead is narrowing, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
ADT Inc.
TriNet Group, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TNET over ADT, 62 versus 61 as of Oct 31, 2026. TNET's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while ADT holds the stronger momentum profile. TNET also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TNET today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. TNET lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 1 points over 30 sessions.
Compare ADT Inc. and TriNet Group, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare ADT and TNET 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 49TNET +9
- Momentum79 vs 71ADT +8
- Risk Resilience49 vs 51Even
- Value73 vs 72Even
1 of 6 evidence groups favor TNET. TNET’s edge is concentrated in quality; ADT keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum +20
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -7
New signals
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.59%)
TNET's lead narrowed by 5 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ADT and TNET both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TNET (TriNet Group, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
ADT (ADT Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, fundamentals, 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
TNETTNET on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
ADTADT on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
ADTADT on the Momentum factor, by 8 points.
Lower downside
ADTADT carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
TNETTNET 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 | TNET | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -23.9% | +16.7% | TNET has more room |
| Target dispersion | +6.7% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 1 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TNET. 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 62 |
| Fundamentals | ADTon balance | revenue growth 2.6% vs -3.9%; EPS growth -4.8% vs -38.6%; TTM ROE 16.8% vs 188.2%; gross margin 51.4% vs 19.1%; operating margin 25% vs 6.2% — ADT takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 73 vs 72 |
| Technicals | ADT | Price vs 50-day 43.4% vs -5.4%; vs 200-day 4.9% vs 31.9% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 49 vs 51 |
| Analyst expectations | TNET | Target upside -23.9% vs 16.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ADT and TNET 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 1 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)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
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 TNET.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28TNET lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 1 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TNET +1
- 61 vs 62
- 7 sessions ago
- TNET +5
- 60 vs 65
- 30 sessions ago
- TNET +6
- 48 vs 54
- 90 sessions ago
- TNET +4
- 56 vs 60
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Sep 4 when ADT moved ahead of TNET.
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 / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only ADT
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (2.79%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
4 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only TNET
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (27.19%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.59%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
ADT 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 is down while the AIQ Score moved up 4 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.1%, AIQ +4 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.91%, 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 9 points behind, the largest single contributor to TNET's edge.
- 2ADT's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3TNET's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 5 points over 30 sessions, and a further 1-point move would eliminate TNET'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
ADT leads on balance| Metric | ADT | TNET |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 2.6% | -3.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -4.8% | -38.6% |
| Gross margin | 51.4% | 19.1% |
| Operating margin | 25% | 6.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 16.8% | 188.2% |
| Debt to equity | 2.21 | 7.6 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | ADT | TNET |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 8.5% | -0.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 15% | 12.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -1.3% | -1.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 3.3% | 64.3% |
| Year to date | -8.2% | 19.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -15.4% | 11.2% |
Technicals
ADT has the stronger structure| Metric | ADT | TNET |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 77.6 | 59.3 |
| ADX (14) | 25.5 | 25.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | 43.4% | -5.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | 4.9% | 31.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 37.3% | 42.3% |
Risk
Split| Metric | ADT | TNET |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.71 | 0.05 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.51 | 0.4 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.62 | 0.54 |
| Max drawdown | -31.2% | -46.8% |
| Current drawdown | -16.2% | -7.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 30.3% | 49.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3% | -4.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ADT or TNET?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TNET is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 62 against ADT's 61. The edge comes from quality. ADT is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 TNET the better buy right now?
TNET carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 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 1 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor TNET over ADT?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. TNET leads Quality by 9 points; ADT leads Momentum by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ADT or TNET?
Analyst price targets imply -23.9% upside for ADT and +16.7% for TNET, so the Street currently favors TNET. 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 TNET?
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, ADT or TNET?
ADT 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 TNET?
ADT on the Momentum factor, by 8 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 TNET?
ADT is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ADT 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 ADT more profitable than TNET?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 51.4% vs 19.1%; operating margin 25% vs 6.2%; ttm roe 16.8% vs 188.2%. ADT leads on two measures and TNET 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 TNET's lead over ADT getting stronger or weaker?
TNET lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 1 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-04, when ADT moved ahead of TNET.
What would change the ADT vs TNET verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ADT closes the Quality gap — currently 9 points behind, the largest single contributor to TNET's edge; ADT's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; TNET's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 5 points over 30 sessions, and a further 1-point move would eliminate TNET's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about ADT and TNET?
ADT: 2 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. TNET: 4 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. 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 TNET it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare ADT and TNET 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.