AEO vs AZO Stock Comparison
Compare AEO and AZO across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between AEO and AZO?
AEO leads the current stock comparison as American Eagle Outfitters, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
American Eagle Outfitters, Inc. vs AutoZone, Inc.
AEO leads
AEO leads by 14 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, and the lead has widened from 3 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors AZO on target upside.
Competitive: 3 of 6 evidence groups support AEO, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
American Eagle Outfitters, Inc.
AutoZone, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors AEO over AZO, 56 versus 42 as of Sep 6, 2026. AEO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while AZO holds the stronger quality profile. AEO also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors AZO. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor AEO today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. AEO lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 14 points over 30 sessions.
Compare American Eagle Outfitters, Inc. and AutoZone, 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 AEO and AZO 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.
- Momentum25%64 vs 32AEO +32
- Value30%68 vs 37AEO +31
- Quality30%46 vs 53AZO +7
- Risk Resilience15%41 vs 44Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor AEO. AEO’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; AZO keeps a meaningful quality 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.
AEO's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AEO and AZO both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
AEO (American Eagle Outfitters, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
AZO (AutoZone, Inc.): the counter-case, on quality, fundamentals, analyst expectations.
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
AEOAEO on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
AZOAZO on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
AEOAEO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 31 points.
Momentum
AEOAEO on the Momentum factor, by 32 points.
Lower downside
AZOAZO carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
AZOAZO on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors AEO, analyst targets favor AZO. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | AEO | AZO | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +9.3% | +24.4% | AZO has more room |
| Target dispersion | +31.6% | +22.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 4 | 10 | 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
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor AEO. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | AEO | 56 vs 42 |
| Fundamentals | AZOon balance | revenue growth -32.1% vs 13.3%; EPS growth -73.1% vs 37.7%; TTM ROE 17.2% vs -80.4%; gross margin 34.8% vs 51.8%; operating margin 7.6% vs 18% — AZO takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | AEO | Value 68 vs 37 |
| Technicals | AEO | Price vs 50-day 2.1% vs -1.7%; vs 200-day -12% vs -11.8% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 41 vs 44 |
| Analyst expectations | AZO | Target upside 9.3% vs 24.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AEO and AZO and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 14 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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)
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 AEO.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 24 – Sep 5AEO lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 14 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- AEO +14
- 56 vs 42
- 7 sessions ago
- AEO +11
- 50 vs 39
- 30 sessions ago
- AEO +3
- 48 vs 45
- 90 sessions ago
- AZO +2
- 47 vs 49
The lead changed hands 8 times in this window, most recently on Aug 20 when AEO moved ahead of AZO.
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 / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (15.95%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.95%)
0 bullish / 4 bearish
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (11.37%)
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (1.1%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
AEO 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 +2.23%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.51%, 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.
- 1AZO closes the Momentum gap — currently 32 points behind, the largest single contributor to AEO's edge.
- 2AZO's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3AEO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 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
AZO leads on balance| Metric | AEO | AZO |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -32.1% | 13.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -73.1% | 37.7% |
| Gross margin | 34.8% | 51.8% |
| Operating margin | 7.6% | 18% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 17.2% | -80.4% |
| Debt to equity | 1.14 | -4.54 |
Performance
AEO leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | AEO | AZO |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 3.1% | 0.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -3.2% | -4.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 5.8% | -4.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -5.8% | -18.1% |
| Year to date | -34.1% | -12% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 27.7% | -28.8% |
Technicals
AEO has the stronger structure| Metric | AEO | AZO |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 60.3 | 46.4 |
| ADX (14) | 11.2 | 10 |
| Price vs 50-day | 2.1% | -1.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | -12% | -11.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 49% | 21.7% |
Risk
Split| Metric | AEO | AZO |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.28 | 0.12 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.04 | -1.19 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.05 | -1.54 |
| Max drawdown | -47.3% | -32.9% |
| Current drawdown | -38.3% | -31.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 52.3% | 29.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.8% | -3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AEO or AZO?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, AEO is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 56 against AZO's 42. The edge comes from momentum and value. AZO 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 AEO or AZO the better buy right now?
AEO carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 6, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor AEO over AZO?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. AEO leads Momentum by 32 points; AEO leads Value by 31 points; AZO leads Quality by 7 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AEO or AZO?
Analyst price targets imply +9.3% upside for AEO and +24.4% for AZO, so the Street currently favors AZO. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors AEO. 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, AEO or AZO?
AEO is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. AEO 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, AEO or AZO?
AZO 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, AEO or AZO?
AEO on the Momentum factor, by 32 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, AEO or AZO?
AZO is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. AZO carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is AEO more profitable than AZO?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 34.8% vs 51.8%; operating margin 7.6% vs 18%; ttm roe 17.2% vs -80.4%. AEO leads on one measure and AZO on two measures, 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 AEO's lead over AZO getting stronger or weaker?
AEO lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 14 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-24 and 2026-09-05. The lead has changed hands 8 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-20, when AEO moved ahead of AZO.
What would change the AEO vs AZO verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: AZO closes the Momentum gap — currently 32 points behind, the largest single contributor to AEO's edge; AZO's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; AEO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 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 AEO and AZO?
AEO: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. AZO: 0 bullish / 4 bearish. 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 AEO is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On AZO it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare AEO and AZO 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.