AMP vs ARES Stock Comparison
AMP currently leads ARES in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 61 vs 40. The clearest difference is risk resilience, while ARES has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between AMP and ARES?
AMP leads the current stock comparison as Ameriprise Financial, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Ameriprise Financial, Inc. vs Ares Management Corporation
AMP leads
AMP leads by 21 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Quality. Wall Street currently favors ARES on target upside.
Stable: 4 of 6 evidence groups support AMP, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Ameriprise Financial, Inc.
Ares Management Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors AMP over ARES, 61 versus 40 as of Oct 24, 2026. AMP's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and quality, while ARES holds the stronger momentum profile. AMP also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors ARES. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor AMP today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability. AMP lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 21 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Ameriprise Financial, Inc. and Ares Management Corporation 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 AMP and ARES 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 Resilience79 vs 40AMP +39
- Quality77 vs 43AMP +34
- Value50 vs 24AMP +26
- Momentum45 vs 54ARES +9
4 of 6 evidence groups favor AMP. AMP’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and quality; ARES keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-23, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-22.
Largest factor move: Momentum -12
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 2 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -2, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 2 active signals are unchanged.
AMP's lead narrowed by 3 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AMP and ARES both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
AMP (Ameriprise Financial, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and quality.
ARES (Ares Management Corporation): the counter-case, on momentum, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 32.6% against 21.1%.
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
AMPAMP on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
AMPAMP on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
AMPAMP on the peer-relative Value factor, by 26 points.
Momentum
ARESARES on the Momentum factor, by 9 points.
Lower downside
AMPAMP on Risk Resilience, by 39 points.
Analyst upside
ARESARES on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors AMP, analyst targets favor ARES. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | AMP | ARES | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +8.4% | +19.1% | ARES has more room |
| Target dispersion | +33.4% | +27.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 5 | 8 | 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.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | AMP | ARES |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 8.96% | 22.87% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $4.090 | $1.600 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $6.280 | $4.480 |
| Years increased | 5 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #124 | #8 |
ARES grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 22.87% a year against AMP's 8.96%. Neither company reduced its regular dividend in any year of the window.
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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor AMP. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | AMP | 61 vs 40 |
| Fundamentals | AMPon balance | revenue growth 2.6% vs -6.8%; EPS growth 23.5% vs -5.8%; TTM ROE 61.7% vs 15.2%; gross margin 50.2% vs 62.7%; operating margin 27.1% vs 23.2% — AMP takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | AMP | Value 50 vs 24 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day -6.5% vs -4.4%; vs 200-day -0.2% vs -3.1% |
| Risk Resilience | AMP | Risk Resilience 79 vs 40 |
| Analyst expectations | ARES | Target upside 8.4% vs 19.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AMP and ARES 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 21 points. (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 AMP.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 24 – Oct 23AMP lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 21 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- AMP +21
- 61 vs 40
- 7 sessions ago
- AMP +32
- 65 vs 33
- 30 sessions ago
- AMP +22
- 54 vs 32
- 90 sessions ago
- AMP +21
- 64 vs 43
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.
AMP and ARES carry the same 2 signals, so the signals do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
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 -0.93%, AIQ -3 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.31%, 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.
- 1ARES closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 39 points behind, the largest single contributor to AMP's edge.
- 2ARES generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active.
- 3AMP's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 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
AMP leads on balance| Metric | AMP | ARES |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 2.6% | -6.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 23.5% | -5.8% |
| Gross margin | 50.2% | 62.7% |
| Operating margin | 27.1% | 23.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 61.7% | 15.2% |
| Debt to equity | 1.03 | 3.75 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | AMP | ARES |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.7% | 8.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.2% | 0.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -8.5% | -4.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 6% | 5.9% |
| Year to date | 0.4% | -24.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 2.7% | -18.7% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | AMP | ARES |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 48.2 | 59.2 |
| ADX (14) | 37.1 | 28.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | -6.5% | -4.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | -0.2% | -3.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 21.1% | 32.6% |
Risk
AMP is the more resilient| Metric | AMP | ARES |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.76 | 1.66 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.14 | -0.35 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.18 | -0.51 |
| Max drawdown | -21.1% | -45.9% |
| Current drawdown | -13.8% | -31.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 26.2% | 43.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.3% | -4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AMP or ARES?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, AMP is the stronger of the two as of Oct 24, 2026, scoring 61 against ARES's 40. The edge comes from risk resilience and quality. ARES 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 AMP or ARES the better buy right now?
AMP carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 24, 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 AMP over ARES?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. AMP leads Risk Resilience by 39 points; AMP leads Quality by 34 points; AMP leads Value by 26 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AMP or ARES?
Analyst price targets imply +8.4% upside for AMP and +19.1% for ARES, so the Street currently favors ARES. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors AMP. 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, AMP or ARES?
AMP is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. AMP on the peer-relative Value factor, by 26 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, AMP or ARES?
AMP 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, AMP or ARES?
ARES on the Momentum factor, by 9 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, AMP or ARES?
AMP is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. AMP on Risk Resilience, by 39 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 AMP more profitable than ARES?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 50.2% vs 62.7%; operating margin 27.1% vs 23.2%; ttm roe 61.7% vs 15.2%. AMP leads on two measures and ARES 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 AMP's lead over ARES getting stronger or weaker?
AMP lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 21 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-24 and 2026-10-23. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the AMP vs ARES verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ARES closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 39 points behind, the largest single contributor to AMP's edge; ARES generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active; AMP's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; 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 AMP and ARES?
AMP: 2 bullish / 0 bearish. ARES: 2 bullish / 0 bearish. The most decision-relevant rule on AMP is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On ARES it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare AMP and ARES 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.