ALRM vs API Stock Comparison
Compare ALRM and API across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between ALRM and API?
ALRM leads the current stock comparison as Alarm.com Holdings, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Alarm.com Holdings, Inc. vs Agora, Inc.
ALRM leads
ALRM leads by 12 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value.
Stable: 5 of 6 evidence groups support ALRM, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Alarm.com Holdings, Inc.
Agora, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ALRM over API, 62 versus 50 as of Sep 11, 2026. ALRM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value. ALRM also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ALRM today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. ALRM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 12 points over 30 sessions. ALRM leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so a sweep is not explained by valuation alone — it deserves additional scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, expectations or event risk.
Compare Alarm.com Holdings, Inc. and Agora, Inc. 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 ALRM and API 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.
- Momentum50 vs 31ALRM +19
- Value67 vs 53ALRM +14
- Risk Resilience69 vs 59ALRM +10
- Quality63 vs 58ALRM +5
5 of 6 evidence groups favor ALRM. ALRM’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value.
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 +3
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +2
No new signals fired.
ALRM's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ALRM and API both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ALRM (Alarm.com Holdings, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
API (Agora, Inc.): the counter-case, on fundamentals — but at materially higher volatility, 47.1% against 22.3%.
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
ALRMALRM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
APIAPI on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
ALRMALRM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 14 points.
Momentum
ALRMALRM on the Momentum factor, by 19 points.
Lower downside
ALRMALRM on Risk Resilience, by 10 points.
Analyst upside
ALRMALRM 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 | ALRM | API | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +8.4% | -35.2% | ALRM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +16.7% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 2 | 1 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor ALRM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | ALRM | 62 vs 50 |
| Fundamentals | APIon balance | revenue growth 4.7% vs 6.9%; EPS growth 2.1% vs 103.1%; TTM ROE 13.9% vs 2%; gross margin 63.4% vs 64.5%; operating margin 13% vs -4.3% — API takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | ALRM | Value 67 vs 53 |
| Technicals | ALRM | Price vs 50-day 1.5% vs -2.5%; vs 200-day 12.3% vs -1.3% |
| Risk Resilience | ALRM | Risk Resilience 69 vs 59 |
| Analyst expectations | ALRM | Target upside 8.4% vs -35.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ALRM and API 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 12 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (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 ALRM.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10ALRM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 12 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- ALRM +12
- 62 vs 50
- 7 sessions ago
- ALRM +10
- 66 vs 56
- 30 sessions ago
- ALRM +10
- 68 vs 58
- 90 sessions ago
- ALRM +13
- 68 vs 55
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on May 29 when ALRM moved ahead of API.
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.
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (11.05%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (1.69%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.79%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
ALRM 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 up over the latest session (price +0.34%, AIQ +1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.5%, 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.
- 1API closes the Momentum gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to ALRM's edge.
- 2API's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3ALRM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 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
API leads on balance| Metric | ALRM | API |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 4.7% | 6.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 2.1% | 103.1% |
| Gross margin | 63.4% | 64.5% |
| Operating margin | 13% | -4.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 13.9% | 2% |
| Debt to equity | 0.66 | 0.18 |
Performance
ALRM leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | ALRM | API |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.4% | -2.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.5% | -9.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 19.5% | -9.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 12.9% | 1.3% |
| Year to date | 8.1% | -0.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -3.2% | 9.8% |
Technicals
ALRM has the stronger structure| Metric | ALRM | API |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 37.4 | 36.9 |
| ADX (14) | 20.1 | 14.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1.5% | -2.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | 12.3% | -1.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 22.3% | 47.1% |
Risk
ALRM is the more resilient| Metric | ALRM | API |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.6 | 0.99 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.03 | 0.39 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.05 | 0.67 |
| Max drawdown | -25.5% | -29% |
| Current drawdown | -4.2% | -23.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 31% | 50.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.1% | -4.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ALRM or API?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ALRM is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 62 against API's 50. The edge comes from momentum and value. 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 ALRM or API the better buy right now?
ALRM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 5 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 ALRM over API?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. ALRM leads Momentum by 19 points; ALRM leads Value by 14 points; ALRM leads Risk Resilience by 10 points. ALRM leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so the sweep is not explained by API simply being cheaper — it warrants extra scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, forward expectations or event risk the factors do not capture.
Which has more analyst upside, ALRM or API?
Analyst price targets imply +8.4% upside for ALRM and -35.2% for API, so the Street currently favors ALRM. 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, ALRM or API?
ALRM is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. ALRM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 14 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, ALRM or API?
API 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, ALRM or API?
ALRM on the Momentum factor, by 19 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, ALRM or API?
ALRM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ALRM on Risk Resilience, by 10 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 ALRM more profitable than API?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 63.4% vs 64.5%; operating margin 13% vs -4.3%; ttm roe 13.9% vs 2%. ALRM leads on two measures and API 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 ALRM's lead over API getting stronger or weaker?
ALRM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 12 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-05-29, when ALRM moved ahead of API.
What would change the ALRM vs API verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: API closes the Momentum gap — currently 19 points behind, the largest single contributor to ALRM's edge; API's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; ALRM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 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 ALRM and API?
ALRM: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. API: 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. The most decision-relevant rule on ALRM is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On API it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare ALRM and API 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.