AES vs SPY Stock Comparison

Compare AES and SPY across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.

Market data as of Sep 11, 2026 market close· AIQ score gap 4 points
AES
Utilities
vs
SPY
Equity
AES
The AES Corporation
Leads
Price
$14.79
Day move
-0.07%
AIQ Score
64/100
Best edge
Value
Sector
Utilities
SPY
State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF
Price
$764
Day move
+0.85%
AIQ Score
60/100
Best edge
Quality
Sector
Equity

What is the main difference between AES and SPY?

AES leads the current stock comparison as The AES Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.

AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison

The AES Corporation vs State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF

Data as of Sep 11, 2026· market close· AES (stock) vs SPY (ETF)· Coverage 66/66 fields· 42/42 directly comparable· Moderate confidence
AIQ VerdictFragileAIQ Comparison Conviction 3/10

AES leads

AES leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from SPY.

Fragile: 2 of 4 evidence groups support AES, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.

Evidence agreement: 2 of 4Comparison trend: Reversed
AES

The AES Corporation

Leads
AIQ Score
64/100
AIQ Edge Score
10/10
SPY

State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF

AIQ Score
60/100
AIQ Edge Score
9/10

The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors AES over SPY, 64 versus 60 as of Sep 11, 2026. AES's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum, while SPY holds the stronger quality profile. AES also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor AES today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. AES lead: Reversed — SPY led by 14 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; AES now leads by 4.

Compare The AES Corporation and State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.

Currently unavailable

Performance over time

Price-return comparison using available daily close history.

AES
-38.0%
SPY
+69.7%

Total return comparison

Growth of $10,000

AES $6,200 · SPY $16,970

Based on available close-price history. Distribution reinvestment is not added unless already reflected in the source series.

Compare AES and SPY against another ticker

Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.

Basic: 2 symbols·Explorer: 3 symbols·Pro and Premium: 5 symbols·Your limit: 2

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.

AES advantage
0
SPY advantage
  • Quality47 vs 84
    SPY +37
  • Value74 vs 39
    AES +35
  • Momentum67 vs 39
    AES +28
  • Risk Resilience71 vs 89
    SPY +18

2 of 4 evidence groups favor AES. AES’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum; SPY 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.

AES-2 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum -11

No new signals fired.

SPY-3 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum -13

No new signals fired.

AES's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.

Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AES and SPY both carry a full feed there.

The central trade-off

AES (The AES Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and momentum.

SPY (State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF): the counter-case, on quality, risk resilience, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 8.5% against 2.9%.

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

AES

AES on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.

Growth

Even

Growth figures are not covered for both names.

Value

AES

AES on the peer-relative Value factor, by 35 points.

Momentum

AES

AES on the Momentum factor, by 28 points.

Lower downside

SPY

SPY on Risk Resilience, by 18 points.

Analyst upside

Even

Analyst targets are level or not covered for both names.

AIQ vs Wall Street

Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.

MeasureAESSPYNote
Implied upside to target+8.2%Level
Target dispersion0%Lower is tighter analyst agreement
ConsensusHoldContext, not a primary driver
Analysts covering1Higher coverage generally improves confidence

Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.

AIQ Agreement Matrix

2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor AES. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.

Evidence groupFavorsReading
AIQ ScoreAES64 vs 60
FundamentalsNot coveredNot covered
ValuationAESValue 74 vs 39
TechnicalsSPYPrice vs 50-day 0.3% vs 0.8%; vs 200-day 1.3% vs 6.2%
Risk ResilienceSPYRisk Resilience 71 vs 89
Analyst expectationsNot coveredNot covered

✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AES and SPY and are excluded from the count.

AIQ Decision Stability

Fragile

The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.

  • The AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
  • Only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
  • The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (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 AES.

How the comparison changed

119 daily snapshots · May 4 Sep 10

AES lead: Reversed — SPY led by 14 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; AES now leads by 4.

May 4AES leads above the line · SPY leads belowSep 10
Today
AES +4
64 vs 60
7 sessions ago
SPY +1
63 vs 64
30 sessions ago
SPY +14
55 vs 69
90 sessions ago
AES +2
61 vs 59

The lead changed hands 7 times in this window, most recently on Aug 27 when SPY moved ahead of AES.

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.

AES

4 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral

  • Golden Cross Active bullish, trend, long horizon (0.97%)
  • EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish bullish, trend, medium horizon
  • Uptrend Structure Active bullish, trend, long horizon
SPYConflicted

3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted

  • Golden Cross Active bullish, trend, long horizon (6.24%)
  • EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish bullish, trend, medium horizon
  • 52-Week High Proximity bullish, risk, long horizon (2.5%)

SPY 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.

AESNo material change

Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.07%, AIQ -2 points).

SPYDivergence

Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 3 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.85%, AIQ -3 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.

  1. 1SPY closes the Value gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to AES's edge.
  2. 2SPY generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover or Uptrend Structure Active.
  3. 3AES's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
  4. 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, 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

Split
MetricAESSPY
Revenue growth (YoY)7.6%
EPS growth (YoY)-11.8%
Gross margin20.3%
Operating margin17.5%
Return on equity (TTM)37.9%
Debt to equity6.5

Performance

SPY leads 4 of 6 windows
MetricAESSPY
1 week (5 sessions)0%-1%
1 month (20 sessions)0.6%-1.9%
3 months (63 sessions)1.2%4.5%
6 months (126 sessions)4%12.1%
Year to date3.2%11.1%
1 year (252 sessions)16.4%16.8%

Technicals

SPY has the stronger structure
MetricAESSPY
RSI (14)5645.1
ADX (14)21.412.3
Price vs 50-day0.3%0.8%
Price vs 200-day1.3%6.2%
Volatility (1M, annualized)2.9%8.5%

Risk

SPY is the more resilient
MetricAESSPY
Beta0.441
Sharpe ratio0.510.95
Sortino ratio0.581.38
Max drawdown-19%-9.1%
Current drawdown-14.3%-2.6%
Annualized volatility33.3%12.9%
Value at risk (95%)-2%-1.4%

Straight answers

Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.

Which is better, AES or SPY?

On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, AES is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 64 against SPY's 60. The edge comes from value and momentum. SPY 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 AES or SPY the better buy right now?

AES carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. Treat the lead as provisional.

Why does the AIQ Score favor AES over SPY?

The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. SPY leads Quality by 37 points; AES leads Value by 35 points; AES leads Momentum by 28 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.

Which has more analyst upside, AES or SPY?

Analyst price targets imply +8.2% upside for AES and not covered for SPY. 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, AES or SPY?

AES is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. AES on the peer-relative Value factor, by 35 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, AES or SPY?

Growth figures are not covered for both names. 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, AES or SPY?

AES on the Momentum factor, by 28 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, AES or SPY?

SPY is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. SPY on Risk Resilience, by 18 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 AES more profitable than SPY?

Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.

Is AES's lead over SPY getting stronger or weaker?

AES lead: Reversed — SPY led by 14 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; AES now leads by 4. 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 2026-08-27, when SPY moved ahead of AES.

What would change the AES vs SPY verdict?

The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: SPY closes the Value gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to AES's edge; SPY generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover or Uptrend Structure Active; AES's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; a regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.

What do the current signals say about AES and SPY?

AES: 4 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. SPY: 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 AES is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On SPY it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).

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.