AJG vs ALL Stock Comparison
Compare AJG and ALL across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between AJG and ALL?
ALL leads the current stock comparison as The Allstate Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. vs The Allstate Corporation
ALL leads
ALL leads by 21 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, and the lead has widened from 14 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors AJG on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support ALL, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Arthur J. Gallagher & Co.
The Allstate Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ALL over AJG, 64 versus 43 as of Sep 11, 2026. ALL's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while AJG holds the stronger risk resilience profile. ALL also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors AJG. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ALL today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. ALL lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 21 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. and The Allstate Corporation 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 AJG and ALL 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.
- Value29 vs 71ALL +42
- Quality65 vs 86ALL +21
- Momentum29 vs 42ALL +13
- Risk Resilience53 vs 46AJG +7
4 of 6 evidence groups favor ALL. ALL’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; AJG 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 -4
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +3
No new signals fired.
ALL's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AJG and ALL both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ALL (The Allstate Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
AJG (Arthur J. Gallagher & Co.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 32.1% against 21.8%.
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
ALLALL on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
ALLALL on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
ALLALL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 42 points.
Momentum
ALLALL on the Momentum factor, by 13 points.
Lower downside
AJGAJG on Risk Resilience, by 7 points.
Analyst upside
AJGAJG on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors ALL, analyst targets favor AJG. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | AJG | ALL | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +13% | +4.6% | AJG has more room |
| Target dispersion | +32.8% | +39.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 10 | 14 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ALL. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | ALL | 43 vs 64 |
| Fundamentals | ALLon balance | revenue growth -15.9% vs 9.8%; EPS growth -60.6% vs 35.3%; TTM ROE 6.7% vs 43.1%; gross margin 74.6% vs 42.2%; operating margin 17% vs 24.8% — ALL takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | ALL | Value 29 vs 71 |
| Technicals | ALL | Price vs 50-day -5.7% vs -1.5%; vs 200-day 4% vs 13.2% |
| Risk Resilience | AJG | Risk Resilience 53 vs 46 |
| Analyst expectations | AJG | Target upside 13% vs 4.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AJG and ALL 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 21 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 ALL.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10ALL lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 21 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- ALL +21
- 43 vs 64
- 7 sessions ago
- ALL +15
- 55 vs 70
- 30 sessions ago
- ALL +14
- 52 vs 66
- 90 sessions ago
- ALL +15
- 60 vs 75
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.
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (8.96%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (15.79%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
ALL 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 and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -1.23%, AIQ -1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.76%, 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.
- 1AJG closes the Value gap — currently 42 points behind, the largest single contributor to ALL's edge.
- 2AJG's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3ALL's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 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
ALL leads on balance| Metric | AJG | ALL |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -15.9% | 9.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -60.6% | 35.3% |
| Gross margin | 74.6% | 42.2% |
| Operating margin | 17% | 24.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 6.7% | 43.1% |
| Debt to equity | 0.09 | 0.22 |
Performance
ALL leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | AJG | ALL |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -8% | -2.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -4.8% | -1.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 10.5% | 12.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 16% | 22.5% |
| Year to date | -6% | 21% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -18.7% | 25.7% |
Technicals
ALL has the stronger structure| Metric | AJG | ALL |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 37.5 | 46.6 |
| ADX (14) | 21.9 | 12.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -5.7% | -1.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | 4% | 13.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 32.1% | 21.8% |
Risk
AJG is the more resilient| Metric | AJG | ALL |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.31 | -0.37 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.63 | 0.89 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.87 | 1.33 |
| Max drawdown | -38.2% | -11.5% |
| Current drawdown | -21.6% | -8.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 31.2% | 24.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.8% | -2.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AJG or ALL?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ALL is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 64 against AJG's 43. The edge comes from value and quality. AJG 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 AJG or ALL the better buy right now?
ALL carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 4 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 ALL over AJG?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. ALL leads Value by 42 points; ALL leads Quality by 21 points; ALL leads Momentum by 13 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AJG or ALL?
Analyst price targets imply +13% upside for AJG and +4.6% for ALL, so the Street currently favors AJG. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors ALL. 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, AJG or ALL?
ALL is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. ALL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 42 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, AJG or ALL?
ALL 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, AJG or ALL?
ALL on the Momentum factor, by 13 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, AJG or ALL?
AJG is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. AJG on Risk Resilience, by 7 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 AJG more profitable than ALL?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 74.6% vs 42.2%; operating margin 17% vs 24.8%; ttm roe 6.7% vs 43.1%. AJG leads on one measure and ALL 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 ALL's lead over AJG getting stronger or weaker?
ALL lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 21 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 AJG vs ALL verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: AJG closes the Value gap — currently 42 points behind, the largest single contributor to ALL's edge; AJG's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; ALL's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 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 AJG and ALL?
AJG: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. ALL: 1 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 AJG is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On ALL it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare AJG and ALL 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.