AMZN vs GOOGL Stock Comparison
Amazon.com, Inc. vs Alphabet Inc.
GOOGL leads
GOOGL leads by 7 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Quality, and the lead has widened from 4 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors AMZN on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support GOOGL, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Amazon.com, Inc.
Alphabet Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors GOOGL over AMZN, 58 versus 51 as of Sep 2, 2026. GOOGL's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and quality, while AMZN holds the stronger momentum profile. GOOGL also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors AMZN. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor GOOGL today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. GOOGL lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 7 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Amazon.com, Inc. and Alphabet Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
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 Resilience15%53 vs 73GOOGL +20
- Quality30%77 vs 95GOOGL +18
- Momentum25%48 vs 42AMZN +6
- Value30%27 vs 28Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor GOOGL. GOOGL’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and quality; AMZN keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-01, compared against the prior scored session 2026-08-31.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
GOOGL's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AMZN and GOOGL both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
GOOGL (Alphabet Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and quality.
AMZN (Amazon.com, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, technicals, analyst expectations.
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
GOOGLGOOGL on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
AMZNAMZN on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
AMZNAMZN on the Momentum factor, by 6 points.
Lower downside
GOOGLGOOGL on Risk Resilience, by 20 points.
Analyst upside
AMZNAMZN on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors GOOGL, analyst targets favor AMZN. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | AMZN | GOOGL | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +27.1% | +25% | AMZN has more room |
| Target dispersion | +35.5% | +29.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 30 | 21 | 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.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor GOOGL. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | GOOGL | 51 vs 58 |
| Fundamentals | GOOGLon balance | revenue growth 10.5% vs 9%; EPS growth 106.4% vs 78.5%; ROE 30.5% vs 50.8%; gross margin 50.8% vs 60.9%; operating margin 12.1% vs 33.1% — GOOGL takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 27 vs 28 |
| Technicals | AMZN | Price vs 50-day 1% vs -3.3%; vs 200-day 8.8% vs 1.4% |
| Risk Resilience | GOOGL | Risk Resilience 53 vs 73 |
| Analyst expectations | AMZN | Target upside 27.1% vs 25% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AMZN and GOOGL and are excluded from the count.
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 moderate at 7 points.
- 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 lead has been steady session to session. (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 GOOGL.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 20 – Sep 1GOOGL lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 7 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- GOOGL +7
- 51 vs 58
- 7 sessions ago
- GOOGL +7
- 48 vs 55
- 30 sessions ago
- GOOGL +4
- 60 vs 64
- 90 sessions ago
- GOOGL +7
- 45 vs 52
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.
3 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (5.54%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (4.30%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
GOOGL 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.15%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.78%, 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.
- 1AMZN closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 20 points behind, the largest single contributor to GOOGL's edge.
- 2AMZN generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3GOOGL's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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
GOOGL leads on balance| Metric | AMZN | GOOGL |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 10.5% | 9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 106.4% | 78.5% |
| Gross margin | 50.8% | 60.9% |
| Operating margin | 12.1% | 33.1% |
| Return on equity | 30.5% | 50.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.4 | 0.18 |
Technicals
AMZN has the stronger structure| Metric | AMZN | GOOGL |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 38.1 | 44.2 |
| ADX (14) | 18.9 | 7.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1% | -3.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | 8.8% | 1.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 26.9% | 24.6% |
Risk
GOOGL is the more resilient| Metric | AMZN | GOOGL |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.44 | 1.37 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.39 | 1.49 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.73 | 2.62 |
| Max drawdown | -21.7% | -21.1% |
| Current drawdown | -8.5% | -15.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 34.8% | 32.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.1% | -2.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AMZN or GOOGL?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, GOOGL is the stronger of the two as of Sep 2, 2026, scoring 58 against AMZN's 51. The edge comes from risk resilience and quality. AMZN 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 AMZN or GOOGL the better buy right now?
GOOGL carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 2, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor GOOGL over AMZN?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. GOOGL leads Risk Resilience by 20 points; GOOGL leads Quality by 18 points; AMZN leads Momentum by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AMZN or GOOGL?
Analyst price targets imply +27.1% upside for AMZN and +25% for GOOGL, so the Street currently favors AMZN. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors GOOGL. 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, AMZN or GOOGL?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. 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, AMZN or GOOGL?
AMZN 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, AMZN or GOOGL?
AMZN on the Momentum factor, by 6 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, AMZN or GOOGL?
GOOGL is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. GOOGL on Risk Resilience, by 20 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 AMZN more profitable than GOOGL?
GOOGL leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 50.8% vs 60.9%; operating margin 12.1% vs 33.1%; roe 30.5% vs 50.8%.
Is GOOGL's lead over AMZN getting stronger or weaker?
GOOGL lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 7 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-20 and 2026-09-01. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the AMZN vs GOOGL verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: AMZN closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 20 points behind, the largest single contributor to GOOGL's edge; AMZN generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover; GOOGL's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about AMZN and GOOGL?
AMZN: 3 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. GOOGL: 1 bullish / 1 bearish, 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 AMZN is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On GOOGL it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare AMZN and GOOGL 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.