AHH vs BXP Stock Comparison
AH Realty Trust, Inc. vs BXP, Inc.
BXP leads
BXP leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 18 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors AHH on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support BXP, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
AH Realty Trust, Inc.
BXP, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors BXP over AHH, 41 versus 36 as of Sep 5, 2026. BXP's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality. BXP also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors AHH. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BXP today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. BXP lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 18 to 5 points over 30 sessions.
Compare AH Realty Trust, Inc. and BXP, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare AHH and BXP 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.
- Quality30%13 vs 27BXP +14
- Value30%49 vs 46Even
- Risk Resilience15%55 vs 52Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor BXP. BXP’s edge is concentrated in quality.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-03, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-02.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +5
No new signals fired.
BXP's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AHH and BXP both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
BXP (BXP, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
AHH (AH Realty Trust, Inc.): the counter-case, on analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 40.5% against 28.4%.
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
BXPBXP on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
AHHAHH on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
BXPBXP carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
AHHAHH on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors BXP, analyst targets favor AHH. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | AHH | BXP | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +33.1% | +5.2% | AHH has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +37.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 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 BXP. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | BXP | 36 vs 41 |
| Fundamentals | BXPon balance | revenue growth 0.4% vs 2.7%; EPS growth 100% vs -32.8%; TTM ROE -8.3% vs 5.8%; gross margin 28% vs 46.8%; operating margin 39.5% vs 35% — BXP takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 49 vs 46 |
| Technicals | BXP | Price vs 50-day 0.4% vs -1.3%; vs 200-day -8.8% vs 7.3% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 55 vs 52 |
| Analyst expectations | AHH | Target upside 33.1% vs 5.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AHH and BXP 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 5 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 BXP.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 22 – Sep 3BXP lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 18 to 5 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- BXP +5
- 36 vs 41
- 7 sessions ago
- BXP +19
- 33 vs 52
- 30 sessions ago
- BXP +18
- 33 vs 51
- 90 sessions ago
- BXP +18
- 33 vs 51
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.
No active signals
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (7.88%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
BXP 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 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.79%, 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.
- 1AHH closes the Quality gap — currently 14 points behind, the largest single contributor to BXP's edge.
- 2AHH generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3BXP's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 13 points over 30 sessions, and a further 5-point move would eliminate BXP'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
BXP leads on balance| Metric | AHH | BXP |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 0.4% | 2.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 100% | -32.8% |
| Gross margin | 28% | 46.8% |
| Operating margin | 39.5% | 35% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -8.3% | 5.8% |
| Debt to equity | 2.03 | 3.17 |
Technicals
BXP has the stronger structure| Metric | AHH | BXP |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 24.3 | 49.2 |
| ADX (14) | 30.8 | 17.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | 0.4% | -1.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | -8.8% | 7.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 40.5% | 28.4% |
Risk
Split| Metric | AHH | BXP |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.45 | 0.67 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.64 | -0.28 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.88 | -0.41 |
| Max drawdown | -21.4% | -35.4% |
| Current drawdown | -17.3% | -13.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 27.5% | 28% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.8% | -2.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AHH or BXP?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, BXP is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 41 against AHH's 36. The edge comes from quality. 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 AHH or BXP the better buy right now?
BXP carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor BXP over AHH?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. BXP leads Quality by 14 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AHH or BXP?
Analyst price targets imply +33.1% upside for AHH and +5.2% for BXP, so the Street currently favors AHH. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors BXP. 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, AHH or BXP?
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, AHH or BXP?
AHH 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, AHH or BXP?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, AHH or BXP?
BXP is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. BXP 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 AHH more profitable than BXP?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 28% vs 46.8%; operating margin 39.5% vs 35%; ttm roe -8.3% vs 5.8%. AHH leads on one measure and BXP 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 BXP's lead over AHH getting stronger or weaker?
BXP lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 18 to 5 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-22 and 2026-09-03. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the AHH vs BXP verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: AHH closes the Quality gap — currently 14 points behind, the largest single contributor to BXP's edge; AHH generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover; BXP's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 13 points over 30 sessions, and a further 5-point move would eliminate BXP's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about AHH and BXP?
AHH: No active signals. BXP: 1 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. On BXP it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare AHH and BXP 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.