AMH vs EQR Stock Comparison
Compare AMH vs EQR on performance, valuation, growth, fundamentals, momentum and risk; the current AIQ evidence does not show a clear headline leader.
What is the main difference between AMH and EQR?
AMH and EQR are close on the current AIQ evidence, so the better fit depends more on objective, risk tolerance and valuation preference than on a single headline score.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
American Homes 4 Rent vs Equity Residential
AMH and EQR are effectively level
AMH and EQR are effectively level on the AIQ Score; the factor table below shows where each one holds its advantage.
American Homes 4 Rent
Equity Residential
The Algovestiq AIQ Score does not currently separate AMH and EQR as of Oct 21, 2026. Both names are scored on the same 0–100 scale across Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience, and the factor table below shows where each one holds its advantage.
Compare American Homes 4 Rent and Equity Residential 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 AMH and EQR 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.
- Risk Resilience69 vs 46AMH +23
- Quality39 vs 47EQR +8
- Value45 vs 50EQR +5
Neither name separates cleanly on the covered dimensions.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +6
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session.
EQR's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AMH and EQR both carry a full feed there.
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
EvenNeither separates on the overall score.
Growth
EQREQR on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EQREQR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 5 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
AMHAMH on Risk Resilience, by 23 points.
Analyst upside
AMHAMH 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 | AMH | EQR | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +15% | +13.5% | AMH has more room |
| Target dispersion | +22.5% | +18% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 10 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | AMH | EQR |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 43.10% | 2.69% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $0.200 | $2.411 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $1.200 | $2.753 |
| Years increased | 5 | 4 |
| No cut in window | Yes | No (1) |
| Cohort rank | #1 | not ranked |
AMH grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 43.10% a year against EQR's 2.69%. AMH never reduced its regular dividend in the window; EQR did in 1 year.
Yield and payout ratio shown elsewhere on this page are current values, not part of the study window.
Split-adjusted regular dividends per share, 2020–2025, excluding special dividends. Research as of Sep 19, 2026.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
How each independent group of evidence reads the pair.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 48 vs 48 |
| Fundamentals | EQR | revenue growth -0.4% vs 0.7%; EPS growth -11.4% vs 25%; TTM ROE 6.9% vs 8.1%; gross margin 30.6% vs 46%; operating margin 25.3% vs 28.1% |
| Valuation | EQR | Value 45 vs 50 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day -3.4% vs -5.6%; vs 200-day -1.4% vs 0.3% |
| Risk Resilience | AMH | Risk Resilience 69 vs 46 |
| Analyst expectations | AMH | Target upside 15% vs 13.5% |
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 0 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 0 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (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)
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20EQR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 6 to 0 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- Level
- 48 vs 48
- 7 sessions ago
- EQR +1
- 47 vs 48
- 30 sessions ago
- EQR +6
- 42 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- AMH +9
- 51 vs 42
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Sep 2 when EQR moved ahead of AMH.
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 / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only AMH
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (1.36%)
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
No active signals
No signal that the other name lacks.
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 -0.71%, AIQ +1 points).
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
EQR leads on balance| Metric | AMH | EQR |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -0.4% | 0.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -11.4% | 25% |
| Gross margin | 30.6% | 46% |
| Operating margin | 25.3% | 28.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 6.9% | 8.1% |
| Debt to equity | 0.76 | 0.81 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | AMH | EQR |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.7% | -3.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.4% | -7.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -6.1% | -0.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 2.1% | -0.3% |
| Year to date | -2.9% | 1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -4.5% | -0.5% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | AMH | EQR |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 60.1 | 32.1 |
| ADX (14) | 29.4 | 15.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -3.4% | -5.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -1.4% | 0.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 15.2% | 22.6% |
Risk
AMH is the more resilient| Metric | AMH | EQR |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.02 | 0.11 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.35 | -0.22 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.58 | -0.34 |
| Max drawdown | -17.9% | -11.7% |
| Current drawdown | -10.5% | -9.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 19.9% | 20.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2% | -2.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which has more analyst upside, AMH or EQR?
Analyst price targets imply +15% upside for AMH and +13.5% for EQR, so the Street currently favors AMH. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, AMH or EQR?
EQR is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. EQR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 5 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, AMH or EQR?
EQR 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, AMH or EQR?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, AMH or EQR?
AMH is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. AMH on Risk Resilience, by 23 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 AMH more profitable than EQR?
EQR leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 30.6% vs 46%; operating margin 25.3% vs 28.1%; ttm roe 6.9% vs 8.1%.
What do the current signals say about AMH and EQR?
AMH: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. EQR: No active signals. The most decision-relevant rule on AMH is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare AMH and EQR 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.