AMZN vs WMT Stock Comparison
AMZN currently leads WMT in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 60 vs 54. The clearest difference is quality.
What is the main difference between AMZN and WMT?
AMZN leads the current stock comparison as Amazon.com, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Amazon.com, Inc. vs Walmart Inc.
AMZN leads
AMZN leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Quality.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support AMZN, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Amazon.com, Inc.
Walmart Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors AMZN over WMT, 60 versus 54 as of Oct 21, 2026. AMZN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality. AMZN also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor AMZN today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability. AMZN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 6 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Amazon.com, Inc. and Walmart 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 AMZN and WMT 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 53AMZN +24
- Momentum75 vs 76Even
- Risk Resilience54 vs 55Even
- Value35 vs 35Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor AMZN. AMZN’s edge is concentrated in quality.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -7
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
AMZN's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AMZN and WMT 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
AMZNAMZN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
AMZNAMZN on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
WMTWMT carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
AMZNAMZN 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 | AMZN | WMT | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +23.6% | +11% | AMZN has more room |
| Target dispersion | +58.6% | +34.4% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 31 | 19 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor AMZN. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | AMZN | 60 vs 54 |
| Fundamentals | AMZN | revenue growth 10.5% vs 5.7%; EPS growth 106.4% vs 19.4%; TTM ROE 30.5% vs 22.7%; gross margin 50.8% vs 25.2%; operating margin 12.1% vs 4.4% |
| Valuation | Even | Value 35 vs 35 |
| Technicals | AMZN | Price vs 50-day 2.3% vs 7.9%; vs 200-day 8% vs -0.4% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 54 vs 55 |
| Analyst expectations | AMZN | Target upside 23.6% vs 11% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AMZN and WMT and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is moderate at 6 points.
- 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 AMZN.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20AMZN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 6 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- AMZN +6
- 60 vs 54
- 7 sessions ago
- AMZN +2
- 56 vs 54
- 30 sessions ago
- AMZN +6
- 52 vs 46
- 90 sessions ago
- AMZN +9
- 56 vs 47
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Sep 24 when AMZN moved ahead of WMT.
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.
4 bullish / 0 bearish
Only AMZN
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (5.54%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
Only WMT
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (8.41%)
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
WMT is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
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 -0.1%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.04%, 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.
- 1WMT closes the Quality gap — currently 24 points behind, the largest single contributor to AMZN's edge.
- 2WMT's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3AMZN'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
AMZN leads on balance| Metric | AMZN | WMT |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 10.5% | 5.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 106.4% | 19.4% |
| Gross margin | 50.8% | 25.2% |
| Operating margin | 12.1% | 4.4% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 30.5% | 22.7% |
| Debt to equity | 0.4 | 0.75 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | AMZN | WMT |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.6% | 5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 3% | 7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 7.3% | 7.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 5.1% | -9.1% |
| Year to date | 13.8% | 5.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 22.5% | 10.7% |
Technicals
AMZN has the stronger structure| Metric | AMZN | WMT |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 62.6 | 80.7 |
| ADX (14) | 14 | 27.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 2.3% | 7.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 8% | -0.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 29.1% | 24.4% |
Risk
Split| Metric | AMZN | WMT |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.46 | -0.1 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.66 | 0.33 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.31 | 0.43 |
| Max drawdown | -21.7% | -23.5% |
| Current drawdown | -7.5% | -12.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 34.7% | 26.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.8% | -2.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AMZN or WMT?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, AMZN is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 60 against WMT's 54. The edge comes from quality. 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 WMT the better buy right now?
AMZN carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor AMZN over WMT?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. AMZN leads Quality by 24 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AMZN or WMT?
Analyst price targets imply +23.6% upside for AMZN and +11% for WMT, so the Street currently favors AMZN. 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, AMZN or WMT?
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 WMT?
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 WMT?
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, AMZN or WMT?
WMT is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. WMT carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is AMZN more profitable than WMT?
AMZN leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 50.8% vs 25.2%; operating margin 12.1% vs 4.4%; ttm roe 30.5% vs 22.7%.
Is AMZN's lead over WMT getting stronger or weaker?
AMZN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 6 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-24, when AMZN moved ahead of WMT.
What would change the AMZN vs WMT verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: WMT closes the Quality gap — currently 24 points behind, the largest single contributor to AMZN's edge; WMT's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; AMZN'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 AMZN and WMT?
AMZN: 4 bullish / 0 bearish. WMT: 2 bullish / 2 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 WMT it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare AMZN and WMT 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.