AMZN vs XLY Stock Comparison
XLY currently leads AMZN in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 61 vs 60. The clearest difference is risk resilience, while AMZN has the stronger quality profile.
What is the main difference between AMZN and XLY?
XLY leads the current stock comparison as State Street Consumer Discretionary Select Sector SPDR ETF, with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Amazon.com, Inc. vs State Street Consumer Discretionary Select Sector SPDR ETF
XLY leads
XLY leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from AMZN.
Fragile: 2 of 4 evidence groups support XLY, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Amazon.com, Inc.
State Street Consumer Discretionary Select Sector SPDR ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors XLY over AMZN, 61 versus 60 as of Oct 21, 2026. XLY's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and value, while AMZN holds the stronger quality profile. XLY also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor XLY today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. XLY lead: Reversed — AMZN led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; XLY now leads by 1.
Compare Amazon.com, Inc. and State Street Consumer Discretionary Select Sector SPDR ETF 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 XLY 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 Resilience54 vs 74XLY +20
- Quality77 vs 67AMZN +10
- Value35 vs 39XLY +4
- Momentum75 vs 74Even
2 of 4 evidence groups favor XLY. XLY’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and value; AMZN keeps a meaningful quality edge.
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 +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 7 active signals are unchanged.
XLY's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AMZN and XLY both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
XLY (State Street Consumer Discretionary Select Sector SPDR ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and value.
AMZN (Amazon.com, Inc.): the counter-case, on quality, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 29.1% against 14.8%.
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
XLYXLY on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
XLYXLY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 4 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
XLYXLY on Risk Resilience, by 20 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 | AMZN | XLY | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +23.6% | — | Level |
| Target dispersion | +58.6% | — | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | — | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 31 | — | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor XLY. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 60 vs 61 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | XLY | Value 35 vs 39 |
| Technicals | AMZN | Price vs 50-day 2.3% vs 1.6%; vs 200-day 8% vs -0.3% |
| Risk Resilience | XLY | Risk Resilience 54 vs 74 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AMZN and XLY 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 narrow at 1 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. (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 XLY.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20XLY lead: Reversed — AMZN led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; XLY now leads by 1.
- Today
- XLY +1
- 60 vs 61
- 7 sessions ago
- XLY +1
- 56 vs 57
- 30 sessions ago
- AMZN +1
- 52 vs 51
- 90 sessions ago
- XLY +4
- 56 vs 60
The lead changed hands 9 times in this window, most recently on Oct 15 when XLY moved ahead of AMZN.
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 / 3 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only XLY
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (1.92%)
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (1.37%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- 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.
XLY 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 -0.1%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.03%, 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 XLY's edge.
- 2AMZN's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed.
- 3XLY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 3 bearish rules at once.
- 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
Split| Metric | AMZN | XLY |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 10.5% | — |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 106.4% | — |
| Gross margin | 50.8% | — |
| Operating margin | 12.1% | — |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 30.5% | — |
| Debt to equity | 0.4 | — |
Performance
AMZN leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | AMZN | XLY |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.6% | 2.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 3% | 2.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 7.3% | 1.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 5.1% | -2.9% |
| Year to date | 13.8% | -3.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 22.5% | -0.6% |
Technicals
AMZN has the stronger structure| Metric | AMZN | XLY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 62.6 | 77.3 |
| ADX (14) | 14 | 17.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | 2.3% | 1.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 8% | -0.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 29.1% | 14.8% |
Risk
XLY is the more resilient| Metric | AMZN | XLY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.46 | 1.16 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.66 | -0.18 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.31 | -0.29 |
| Max drawdown | -21.7% | -15.2% |
| Current drawdown | -7.5% | -7.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 34.7% | 19.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.8% | -2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AMZN or XLY?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, XLY is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 61 against AMZN's 60. The edge comes from risk resilience and value. AMZN is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 XLY the better buy right now?
XLY carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor XLY over AMZN?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. XLY leads Risk Resilience by 20 points; AMZN leads Quality by 10 points; XLY leads Value by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AMZN or XLY?
Analyst price targets imply +23.6% upside for AMZN and not covered for XLY. 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 XLY?
XLY is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. XLY on the peer-relative Value factor, by 4 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, AMZN or XLY?
Growth figures are not covered for both names. 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 XLY?
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 XLY?
XLY is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. XLY on Risk Resilience, by 20 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 AMZN more profitable than XLY?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is XLY's lead over AMZN getting stronger or weaker?
XLY lead: Reversed — AMZN led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; XLY now leads by 1. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 9 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-15, when XLY moved ahead of AMZN.
What would change the AMZN vs XLY 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 XLY's edge; AMZN's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed; XLY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 3 bearish rules at once; 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 XLY?
AMZN: 4 bullish / 0 bearish. XLY: 2 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral, 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 XLY it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
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.