AFL vs AIZ Stock Comparison
Compare AFL and AIZ across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between AFL and AIZ?
AIZ leads the current stock comparison as Assurant, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Aflac Incorporated vs Assurant, Inc.
AIZ leads
AIZ leads by 8 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum, but the lead has narrowed from 12 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 5 of 6 evidence groups support AIZ, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Aflac Incorporated
Assurant, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors AIZ over AFL, 61 versus 53 as of Sep 11, 2026. AIZ's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum, while AFL holds the stronger risk resilience profile. AIZ also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor AIZ today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. AIZ lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 12 to 8 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Aflac Incorporated and Assurant, 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 AFL and AIZ 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.
- Value43 vs 61AIZ +18
- Momentum36 vs 45AIZ +9
- Risk Resilience75 vs 66AFL +9
- Quality66 vs 73AIZ +7
5 of 6 evidence groups favor AIZ. AIZ’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum; AFL keeps a meaningful risk resilience 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 -6
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -3
No new signals fired.
AIZ's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AFL and AIZ both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
AIZ (Assurant, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and momentum.
AFL (Aflac Incorporated): the counter-case, on risk resilience — but at materially higher volatility, 20.7% against 14.9%.
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
AIZAIZ on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
AIZAIZ on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
AIZAIZ on the peer-relative Value factor, by 18 points.
Momentum
AIZAIZ on the Momentum factor, by 9 points.
Lower downside
AFLAFL on Risk Resilience, by 9 points.
Analyst upside
AIZAIZ 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 | AFL | AIZ | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +0.8% | +8.9% | AIZ has more room |
| Target dispersion | +33.6% | +28.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 7 | 6 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor AIZ. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | AIZ | 53 vs 61 |
| Fundamentals | AIZon balance | EPS growth -17.6% vs 9.4%; TTM ROE 16.4% vs 18%; gross margin 53.9% vs 78.1%; operating margin 32.2% vs 9.9% — AIZ takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | AIZ | Value 43 vs 61 |
| Technicals | AIZ | Price vs 50-day -4.9% vs 0.3%; vs 200-day 0.1% vs 13.9% |
| Risk Resilience | AFL | Risk Resilience 75 vs 66 |
| Analyst expectations | AIZ | Target upside 0.8% vs 8.9% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AFL and AIZ 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 moderate at 8 points.
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 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 AIZ.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10AIZ lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 12 to 8 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- AIZ +8
- 53 vs 61
- 7 sessions ago
- AIZ +13
- 54 vs 67
- 30 sessions ago
- AIZ +12
- 51 vs 63
- 90 sessions ago
- AIZ +9
- 63 vs 72
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.
1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (5.76%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (14.13%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
AIZ 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.
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.71%, AIQ -2 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.53%, 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.
- 1AFL closes the Value gap — currently 18 points behind, the largest single contributor to AIZ's edge.
- 2AFL's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3AIZ's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 8-point move would eliminate AIZ'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
AIZ leads on balance| Metric | AFL | AIZ |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -5.4% | 1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -17.6% | 9.4% |
| Gross margin | 53.9% | 78.1% |
| Operating margin | 32.2% | 9.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 16.4% | 18% |
| Debt to equity | 0.29 | 0.36 |
Performance
AIZ leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | AFL | AIZ |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.4% | -1.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -5.2% | -0.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -2.3% | 9.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 4.7% | 29.7% |
| Year to date | 3.8% | 16.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 7.6% | 32.7% |
Technicals
AIZ has the stronger structure| Metric | AFL | AIZ |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 43.7 | 48.5 |
| ADX (14) | 29 | 17.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | -4.9% | 0.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | 0.1% | 13.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 20.7% | 14.9% |
Risk
AFL is the more resilient| Metric | AFL | AIZ |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.17 | 0.14 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.29 | 1.22 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.44 | 1.6 |
| Max drawdown | -11.6% | -12.9% |
| Current drawdown | -11.6% | -6.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 17.4% | 22.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.7% | -2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AFL or AIZ?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, AIZ is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 61 against AFL's 53. The edge comes from value and momentum. AFL 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 AFL or AIZ the better buy right now?
AIZ carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 5 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 AIZ over AFL?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. AIZ leads Value by 18 points; AIZ leads Momentum by 9 points; AFL leads Risk Resilience by 9 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AFL or AIZ?
Analyst price targets imply +0.8% upside for AFL and +8.9% for AIZ, so the Street currently favors AIZ. 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, AFL or AIZ?
AIZ is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. AIZ on the peer-relative Value factor, by 18 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, AFL or AIZ?
AIZ 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, AFL or AIZ?
AIZ on the Momentum factor, by 9 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, AFL or AIZ?
AFL is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. AFL on Risk Resilience, by 9 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 AFL more profitable than AIZ?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 53.9% vs 78.1%; operating margin 32.2% vs 9.9%; ttm roe 16.4% vs 18%. AFL leads on one measure and AIZ 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 AIZ's lead over AFL getting stronger or weaker?
AIZ lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 12 to 8 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the AFL vs AIZ verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: AFL closes the Value gap — currently 18 points behind, the largest single contributor to AIZ's edge; AFL's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; AIZ's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 8-point move would eliminate AIZ's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about AFL and AIZ?
AFL: 1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. AIZ: 2 bullish / 1 bearish, 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 AFL is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On AIZ it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare AFL and AIZ 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.