AMP vs BEN Stock Comparison
AMP currently leads BEN in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 61 vs 47. The clearest difference is quality, while BEN has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between AMP and BEN?
AMP leads the current stock comparison as Ameriprise Financial, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Ameriprise Financial, Inc. vs Franklin Resources, Inc.
AMP leads
AMP leads by 14 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience, and the lead has widened from 5 points over 30 sessions.
Stable: 3 of 6 evidence groups support AMP, its lead is widening, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Ameriprise Financial, Inc.
Franklin Resources, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors AMP over BEN, 61 versus 47 as of Oct 24, 2026. AMP's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while BEN holds the stronger value profile. AMP also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor AMP today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. AMP lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 14 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Ameriprise Financial, Inc. and Franklin Resources, 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 AMP and BEN 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.
- Quality77 vs 46AMP +31
- Risk Resilience79 vs 51AMP +28
- Momentum45 vs 35AMP +10
- Value50 vs 55BEN +5
3 of 6 evidence groups favor AMP. AMP’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; BEN keeps a meaningful value 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 -3, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 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 BEN both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
AMP (Ameriprise Financial, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
BEN (Franklin Resources, Inc.): the counter-case, on value, valuation, technicals.
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
BENBEN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 5 points.
Momentum
AMPAMP on the Momentum factor, by 10 points.
Lower downside
AMPAMP on Risk Resilience, by 28 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 | AMP | BEN | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +8.4% | +8.4% | Level |
| Target dispersion | +33.4% | +35.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 5 | 6 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | AMP | BEN |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 8.96% | 3.43% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $4.090 | $1.090 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $6.280 | $1.290 |
| Years increased | 5 | 3 |
| No cut in window | Yes | No (2) |
| Cohort rank | #124 | not ranked |
AMP grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 8.96% a year against BEN's 3.43%. AMP never reduced its regular dividend in the window; BEN did in 2 years.
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
3 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 47 |
| Fundamentals | AMPon balance | revenue growth 2.6% vs 2.8%; EPS growth 23.5% vs -40.4%; TTM ROE 61.7% vs 7.4%; gross margin 50.2% vs 67.6%; operating margin 27.1% vs 9.7% — AMP takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | BEN | Value 50 vs 55 |
| Technicals | BEN | Price vs 50-day -6.5% vs -5.9%; vs 200-day -0.2% vs 3.2% |
| Risk Resilience | AMP | Risk Resilience 79 vs 51 |
| Analyst expectations | Even | Target upside 8.4% vs 8.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AMP and BEN 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 14 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (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: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 14 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- AMP +14
- 61 vs 47
- 7 sessions ago
- AMP +19
- 65 vs 46
- 30 sessions ago
- AMP +5
- 54 vs 49
- 90 sessions ago
- AMP +10
- 64 vs 54
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.
2 bullish / 0 bearish
No signal that the other name lacks.
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only BEN
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that 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 -1.46%, 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.
- 1BEN closes the Quality gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to AMP's edge.
- 2BEN's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 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 | BEN |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 2.6% | 2.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 23.5% | -40.4% |
| Gross margin | 50.2% | 67.6% |
| Operating margin | 27.1% | 9.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 61.7% | 7.4% |
| Debt to equity | 1.03 | 1.42 |
Performance
BEN leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | AMP | BEN |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.7% | 0.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.2% | -5.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -8.5% | -6.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 6% | 14.5% |
| Year to date | 0.4% | 30% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 2.7% | 37.1% |
Technicals
BEN has the stronger structure| Metric | AMP | BEN |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 48.2 | 33.6 |
| ADX (14) | 37.1 | 27 |
| Price vs 50-day | -6.5% | -5.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | -0.2% | 3.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 21.1% | 21.2% |
Risk
AMP is the more resilient| Metric | AMP | BEN |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.76 | 1.21 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.14 | 1.16 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.18 | 1.8 |
| Max drawdown | -21.1% | -19.2% |
| Current drawdown | -13.8% | -13.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 26.2% | 27.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.3% | -2.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AMP or BEN?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, AMP is the stronger of the two as of Oct 24, 2026, scoring 61 against BEN's 47. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. BEN 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 AMP or BEN the better buy right now?
AMP carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 24, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 3 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 BEN?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. AMP leads Quality by 31 points; AMP leads Risk Resilience by 28 points; AMP leads Momentum by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AMP or BEN?
Analyst price targets imply +8.4% upside for AMP and +8.4% for BEN. 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, AMP or BEN?
BEN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. BEN 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, AMP or BEN?
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 BEN?
AMP on the Momentum factor, by 10 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 BEN?
AMP is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. AMP on Risk Resilience, by 28 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 BEN?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 50.2% vs 67.6%; operating margin 27.1% vs 9.7%; ttm roe 61.7% vs 7.4%. AMP leads on two measures and BEN 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 BEN getting stronger or weaker?
AMP lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 14 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 BEN verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: BEN closes the Quality gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to AMP's edge; BEN's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; 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 BEN?
AMP: 2 bullish / 0 bearish. BEN: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. The most decision-relevant rule on AMP is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On BEN it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare AMP and BEN 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.