AGNC vs NLY Stock Comparison
NLY currently leads AGNC in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 50 vs 49. The clearest difference is balanced.
What is the main difference between AGNC and NLY?
NLY leads the current stock comparison as Annaly Capital Management, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from balanced and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
AGNC Investment Corp. vs Annaly Capital Management, Inc.
NLY leads
NLY leads by 1 AIQ points. Wall Street currently favors AGNC on target upside.
Fragile: 1 of 6 evidence groups support NLY, and its current signal state is conflicted.
AGNC Investment Corp.
Annaly Capital Management, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors NLY over AGNC, 50 versus 49 as of Oct 21, 2026. NLY also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors AGNC. 1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor NLY today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. NLY lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions.
Compare AGNC Investment Corp. and Annaly Capital Management, 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 AGNC and NLY 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.
- Value69 vs 72Even
- Momentum36 vs 34Even
- Risk Resilience35 vs 36Even
- Quality48 vs 48Even
1 of 6 evidence groups favor NLY. Neither name separates cleanly on the covered dimensions.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +11
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +9
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
NLY's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AGNC and NLY both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
NLY (Annaly Capital Management, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile.
AGNC (AGNC Investment Corp.): the counter-case, on technicals, 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
NLYNLY on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
NLYNLY on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
NLYNLY carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
AGNCAGNC on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors NLY, analyst targets favor AGNC. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | AGNC | NLY | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +28.1% | +25.9% | AGNC has more room |
| Target dispersion | +17.8% | +13.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 2 | 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.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | AGNC | NLY |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | -1.59% | -5.11% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $1.560 | $3.640 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $1.440 | $2.800 |
| Years increased | 0 | 1 |
| No cut in window | No (1) | No (2) |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | not ranked |
AGNC grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — -1.59% a year against NLY's -5.11%.
Yield and payout ratio shown elsewhere on this page are current values, not part of the study window.
Split-adjusted regular dividends per share, 2020–2025, excluding special dividends. Research as of Sep 19, 2026.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor NLY. 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 | 49 vs 50 |
| Fundamentals | NLYon balance | revenue growth -100% vs 37.1%; EPS growth 4.1% vs 224.2%; TTM ROE 18.3% vs 18.4%; gross margin 75.7% vs 99.3%; operating margin 112.8% vs 111.8% — NLY takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 69 vs 72 |
| Technicals | AGNC | Price vs 50-day -11.5% vs -14.7%; vs 200-day -16.9% vs -17.4% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 35 vs 36 |
| Analyst expectations | AGNC | Target upside 28.1% vs 25.9% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AGNC and NLY 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 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 NLY.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20NLY lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- NLY +1
- 49 vs 50
- 7 sessions ago
- NLY +1
- 47 vs 48
- 30 sessions ago
- NLY +1
- 48 vs 49
- 90 sessions ago
- NLY +3
- 56 vs 59
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Jun 30 when AGNC moved ahead of NLY.
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.
AGNC and NLY carry the same 5 signals, so the signals do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, Death Cross Active, 52-Week Low Proximity, Downtrend Structure Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
NLY 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 down while the AIQ Score moved up 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.23%, AIQ +2 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.53%, AIQ +2 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.
- 1AGNC's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 2NLY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 3 bearish rules at once.
- 3A 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
NLY leads on balance| Metric | AGNC | NLY |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -100% | 37.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 4.1% | 224.2% |
| Gross margin | 75.7% | 99.3% |
| Operating margin | 112.8% | 111.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 18.3% | 18.4% |
| Debt to equity | 7.16 | 7.38 |
Performance
AGNC leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | AGNC | NLY |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.2% | 0.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -12.8% | -14.7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -17.9% | -18.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -19.3% | -19.1% |
| Year to date | -17.9% | -18.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -11.3% | -10.8% |
Technicals
AGNC has the stronger structure| Metric | AGNC | NLY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 43.1 | 41 |
| ADX (14) | 49.8 | 56.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | -11.5% | -14.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | -16.9% | -17.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 32.7% | 30.5% |
Risk
Split| Metric | AGNC | NLY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.71 | 0.58 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.64 | -0.68 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.95 | -0.9 |
| Max drawdown | -30.6% | -27.4% |
| Current drawdown | -27.7% | -25% |
| Annualized volatility | 22.2% | 21.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.4% | -2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AGNC or NLY?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, NLY is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 50 against AGNC's 49. The edge comes from its factor profile. 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 AGNC or NLY the better buy right now?
NLY carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 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 NLY over AGNC?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. . Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AGNC or NLY?
Analyst price targets imply +28.1% upside for AGNC and +25.9% for NLY, so the Street currently favors AGNC. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors NLY. 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, AGNC or NLY?
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, AGNC or NLY?
NLY 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, AGNC or NLY?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, AGNC or NLY?
NLY is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. NLY 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 AGNC more profitable than NLY?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 75.7% vs 99.3%; operating margin 112.8% vs 111.8%; ttm roe 18.3% vs 18.4%. 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 NLY's lead over AGNC getting stronger or weaker?
NLY lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-06-30, when AGNC moved ahead of NLY.
What would change the AGNC vs NLY verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: AGNC's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; NLY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 3 bearish rules at once; 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 AGNC and NLY?
AGNC: 1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. NLY: 1 bullish / 3 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 AGNC is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On NLY it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare AGNC and NLY 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.