ALHC vs BKD Stock Comparison
Alignment Healthcare, Inc. vs Brookdale Senior Living Inc.
BKD leads
BKD leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 7 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support BKD, its lead is narrowing, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Alignment Healthcare, Inc.
Brookdale Senior Living Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors BKD over ALHC, 46 versus 42 as of Sep 5, 2026. BKD's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while ALHC holds the stronger momentum profile. BKD also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BKD today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. BKD lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 7 to 4 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Alignment Healthcare, Inc. and Brookdale Senior Living Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare ALHC and BKD 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.
- Value30%42 vs 65BKD +23
- Momentum25%44 vs 31ALHC +13
- Risk Resilience15%51 vs 45ALHC +6
- Quality30%37 vs 41BKD +4
4 of 6 evidence groups favor BKD. BKD’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; ALHC keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-04, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-03.
Largest factor move: Momentum +7
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +4
No new signals fired.
BKD's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ALHC and BKD both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
BKD (Brookdale Senior Living Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
ALHC (Alignment Healthcare, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, risk resilience, fundamentals.
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
BKDBKD on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
ALHCALHC on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
BKDBKD on the peer-relative Value factor, by 23 points.
Momentum
ALHCALHC on the Momentum factor, by 13 points.
Lower downside
ALHCALHC on Risk Resilience, by 6 points.
Analyst upside
BKDBKD 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 | ALHC | BKD | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +44.8% | +61.4% | BKD has more room |
| Target dispersion | +30.6% | +26.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 3 | 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 BKD. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | BKD | 42 vs 46 |
| Fundamentals | ALHCon balance | revenue growth 8.1% vs -6%; EPS growth 223.7% vs 4.5%; TTM ROE 20% vs 4.1%; gross margin 12.5% vs 14.4%; operating margin 1.2% vs 3.8% — ALHC takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | BKD | Value 42 vs 65 |
| Technicals | BKD | Price vs 50-day -21.4% vs -15.1%; vs 200-day -28.3% vs -11.7% |
| Risk Resilience | ALHC | Risk Resilience 51 vs 45 |
| Analyst expectations | BKD | Target upside 44.8% vs 61.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ALHC and BKD 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 narrow at 4 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
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 BKD.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 23 – Sep 4BKD lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 7 to 4 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- BKD +4
- 42 vs 46
- 7 sessions ago
- BKD +3
- 41 vs 44
- 30 sessions ago
- BKD +7
- 37 vs 44
- 90 sessions ago
- BKD +7
- 51 vs 58
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Jun 12 when BKD moved ahead of ALHC.
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 / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (9.62%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (4.06%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.97%)
ALHC is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.04%, AIQ +2 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.42%, 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.
- 1ALHC closes the Value gap — currently 23 points behind, the largest single contributor to BKD's edge.
- 2ALHC's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3BKD's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 4-point move would eliminate BKD'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
ALHC leads on balance| Metric | ALHC | BKD |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 8.1% | -6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 223.7% | 4.5% |
| Gross margin | 12.5% | 14.4% |
| Operating margin | 1.2% | 3.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 20% | 4.1% |
| Debt to equity | 1.25 | -44.49 |
Performance
BKD leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | ALHC | BKD |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.6% | 0.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -5.8% | -17.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -11.9% | -4.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -26.6% | -21% |
| Year to date | -31.4% | 9.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -17% | 54.3% |
Technicals
BKD has the stronger structure| Metric | ALHC | BKD |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 51.5 | 36.5 |
| ADX (14) | 21 | 26.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -21.4% | -15.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -28.3% | -11.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 37.6% | 41.4% |
Risk
ALHC is the more resilient| Metric | ALHC | BKD |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.32 | 0.4 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.05 | 1.18 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.07 | 1.84 |
| Max drawdown | -48% | -30.1% |
| Current drawdown | -44.9% | -29.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 61.8% | 40% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5% | -3.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ALHC or BKD?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, BKD is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 46 against ALHC's 42. The edge comes from value and quality. ALHC is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 ALHC or BKD the better buy right now?
BKD carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 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 BKD over ALHC?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. BKD leads Value by 23 points; ALHC leads Momentum by 13 points; ALHC leads Risk Resilience by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ALHC or BKD?
Analyst price targets imply +44.8% upside for ALHC and +61.4% for BKD, so the Street currently favors BKD. 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, ALHC or BKD?
BKD is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. BKD on the peer-relative Value factor, by 23 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, ALHC or BKD?
ALHC 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, ALHC or BKD?
ALHC on the Momentum factor, by 13 points. 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, ALHC or BKD?
ALHC is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ALHC on Risk Resilience, by 6 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is ALHC more profitable than BKD?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 12.5% vs 14.4%; operating margin 1.2% vs 3.8%; ttm roe 20% vs 4.1%. ALHC leads on one measure and BKD 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 BKD's lead over ALHC getting stronger or weaker?
BKD lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 7 to 4 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-23 and 2026-09-04. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-06-12, when BKD moved ahead of ALHC.
What would change the ALHC vs BKD verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ALHC closes the Value gap — currently 23 points behind, the largest single contributor to BKD's edge; ALHC's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; BKD's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 4-point move would eliminate BKD's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about ALHC and BKD?
ALHC: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. BKD: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral. 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 ALHC is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On BKD it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare ALHC and BKD 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.