ALGN vs XRAY Stock Comparison
ALGN currently leads XRAY in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 67 vs 51. The clearest difference is quality, while XRAY has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between ALGN and XRAY?
ALGN leads the current stock comparison as Align Technology, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Align Technology, Inc. vs DENTSPLY SIRONA Inc.
ALGN leads
ALGN leads by 16 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 11 points over 30 sessions.
Stable: 4 of 6 evidence groups support ALGN, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Align Technology, Inc.
DENTSPLY SIRONA Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ALGN over XRAY, 67 versus 51 as of Oct 31, 2026. ALGN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while XRAY holds the stronger value profile. ALGN also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ALGN today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. ALGN lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 11 to 16 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Align Technology, Inc. and DENTSPLY SIRONA 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 ALGN and XRAY 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.
- Quality70 vs 27ALGN +43
- Momentum76 vs 53ALGN +23
- Value62 vs 73XRAY +11
- Risk Resilience58 vs 51ALGN +7
4 of 6 evidence groups favor ALGN. ALGN’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; XRAY keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
ALGN's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ALGN and XRAY both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ALGN (Align Technology, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
XRAY (DENTSPLY SIRONA Inc.): the counter-case, on value, valuation — but at materially higher volatility, 39.4% against 23.9%.
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
ALGNALGN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
XRAYXRAY on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
XRAYXRAY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 points.
Momentum
ALGNALGN on the Momentum factor, by 23 points.
Lower downside
ALGNALGN on Risk Resilience, by 7 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst 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.
| Measure | ALGN | XRAY | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +28.4% | +28.8% | Level |
| Target dispersion | +27.5% | +65.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 6 | 7 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ALGN. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | ALGN | 67 vs 51 |
| Fundamentals | ALGNon balance | revenue growth 1.5% vs 2%; EPS growth -4.4% vs 4.6%; TTM ROE 10.1% vs -39.8%; gross margin 66.5% vs 49.5%; operating margin 13.3% vs 11.7% — ALGN takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | XRAY | Value 62 vs 73 |
| Technicals | ALGN | Price vs 50-day -0.6% vs -2.3%; vs 200-day -9.1% vs -16.9% |
| Risk Resilience | ALGN | Risk Resilience 58 vs 51 |
| Analyst expectations | Even | Target upside 28.4% vs 28.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ALGN and XRAY and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 16 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 ALGN.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28ALGN lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 11 to 16 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- ALGN +16
- 67 vs 51
- 7 sessions ago
- ALGN +16
- 68 vs 52
- 30 sessions ago
- ALGN +11
- 55 vs 44
- 90 sessions ago
- ALGN +11
- 54 vs 43
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Jul 28 when ALGN moved ahead of XRAY.
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 / 2 bearish, conflicted
Only ALGN
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only XRAY
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.67%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
ALGN 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 -2.49%, AIQ -1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.83%, 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.
- 1XRAY closes the Quality gap — currently 43 points behind, the largest single contributor to ALGN's edge.
- 2XRAY's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3ALGN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 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
ALGN leads on balance| Metric | ALGN | XRAY |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 1.5% | 2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -4.4% | 4.6% |
| Gross margin | 66.5% | 49.5% |
| Operating margin | 13.3% | 11.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 10.1% | -39.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.03 | 1.71 |
Performance
ALGN leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | ALGN | XRAY |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.5% | 4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 5.7% | 6.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -11.4% | -31.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -13.9% | -17.8% |
| Year to date | -1.6% | -17.4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 13.6% | -28% |
Technicals
ALGN has the stronger structure| Metric | ALGN | XRAY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 72.2 | 62.9 |
| ADX (14) | 24.1 | 27.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -0.6% | -2.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | -9.1% | -16.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 23.9% | 39.4% |
Risk
ALGN is the more resilient| Metric | ALGN | XRAY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.3 | 1.14 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.46 | -0.53 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.79 | -0.84 |
| Max drawdown | -29.2% | -42.6% |
| Current drawdown | -22.2% | -35.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 39.3% | 47.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.6% | -4.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ALGN or XRAY?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ALGN is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 67 against XRAY's 51. The edge comes from quality and momentum. XRAY is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 ALGN or XRAY the better buy right now?
ALGN carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Stable rating means the gap is wide and the evidence is broad, so the conclusion is unlikely to turn on a single session.
Why does the AIQ Score favor ALGN over XRAY?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. ALGN leads Quality by 43 points; ALGN leads Momentum by 23 points; XRAY leads Value by 11 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ALGN or XRAY?
Analyst price targets imply +28.4% upside for ALGN and +28.8% for XRAY. 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, ALGN or XRAY?
XRAY is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. XRAY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 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, ALGN or XRAY?
XRAY 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, ALGN or XRAY?
ALGN on the Momentum factor, by 23 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, ALGN or XRAY?
ALGN is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ALGN 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 ALGN more profitable than XRAY?
ALGN leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 66.5% vs 49.5%; operating margin 13.3% vs 11.7%; ttm roe 10.1% vs -39.8%.
Is ALGN's lead over XRAY getting stronger or weaker?
ALGN lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 11 to 16 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-28, when ALGN moved ahead of XRAY.
What would change the ALGN vs XRAY verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: XRAY closes the Quality gap — currently 43 points behind, the largest single contributor to ALGN's edge; XRAY's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; ALGN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 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 ALGN and XRAY?
ALGN: 1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. XRAY: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 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 ALGN is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On XRAY it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare ALGN and XRAY 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.