AOS vs WST Stock Comparison
Compare AOS and WST across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between AOS and WST?
AOS leads the current stock comparison as A. O. Smith Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
A. O. Smith Corporation vs West Pharmaceutical Services, Inc.
AOS leads
AOS leads by 8 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support AOS, and its current signal state is conflicted.
A. O. Smith Corporation
West Pharmaceutical Services, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors AOS over WST, 56 versus 48 as of Sep 11, 2026. AOS's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while WST holds the stronger risk resilience profile. AOS also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor AOS today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. AOS lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 8 points over 30 sessions.
Compare A. O. Smith Corporation and West Pharmaceutical Services, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price-return comparison using available daily close history.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000
Based on available close-price history. Distribution reinvestment is not added unless already reflected in the source series.
Compare AOS and WST 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.
- Value66 vs 26AOS +40
- Risk Resilience63 vs 79WST +16
- Momentum23 vs 37WST +14
- Quality69 vs 63AOS +6
4 of 6 evidence groups favor AOS. AOS’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; WST keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +9
No new signals fired.
AOS's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AOS and WST both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
AOS (A. O. Smith Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
WST (West Pharmaceutical Services, Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, momentum, 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
AOSAOS on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
WSTWST on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
AOSAOS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 40 points.
Momentum
WSTWST on the Momentum factor, by 14 points.
Lower downside
WSTWST on Risk Resilience, by 16 points.
Analyst upside
AOSAOS 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 | AOS | WST | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +28.7% | +10.5% | AOS has more room |
| Target dispersion | +17.6% | +35.8% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 4 | 5 | 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 AOS. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | AOS | 56 vs 48 |
| Fundamentals | AOSon balance | revenue growth 6.2% vs 3.2%; EPS growth 5.9% vs 12.4%; TTM ROE 27% vs 18.5%; gross margin 38.6% vs 36.8%; operating margin 17.6% vs 20.6% — AOS takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | AOS | Value 66 vs 26 |
| Technicals | WST | Price vs 50-day -6% vs -0.9%; vs 200-day -12.9% vs 16.7% |
| Risk Resilience | WST | Risk Resilience 63 vs 79 |
| Analyst expectations | AOS | Target upside 28.7% vs 10.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AOS and WST 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 8 points.
- 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 AOS.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10AOS lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 8 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- AOS +8
- 56 vs 48
- 7 sessions ago
- AOS +12
- 60 vs 48
- 30 sessions ago
- AOS +10
- 66 vs 56
- 90 sessions ago
- AOS +6
- 64 vs 58
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 / 4 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (6.63%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (18.40%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
AOS 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 +1.2%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.58%, AIQ +2 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.
- 1WST closes the Value gap — currently 40 points behind, the largest single contributor to AOS's edge.
- 2WST's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3AOS's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 4 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
AOS leads on balance| Metric | AOS | WST |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 6.2% | 3.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 5.9% | 12.4% |
| Gross margin | 38.6% | 36.8% |
| Operating margin | 17.6% | 20.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 27% | 18.5% |
| Debt to equity | 0.37 | 0.1 |
Performance
WST leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | AOS | WST |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -4.3% | 0.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -9.4% | -2.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -0.9% | 4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -16.7% | 44.5% |
| Year to date | -15.2% | 25.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -22.3% | 36% |
Technicals
WST has the stronger structure| Metric | AOS | WST |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 25.7 | 38.9 |
| ADX (14) | 17.5 | 13.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | -6% | -0.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | -12.9% | 16.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 28.6% | 18.6% |
Risk
WST is the more resilient| Metric | AOS | WST |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.76 | 0.64 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.89 | 0.97 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.49 | 1.55 |
| Max drawdown | -30.7% | -24.8% |
| Current drawdown | -29.5% | -5.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 27.1% | 34% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.8% | -3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AOS or WST?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, AOS is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 56 against WST's 48. The edge comes from value and quality. WST is not without a case — it holds the better risk resilience 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 AOS or WST the better buy right now?
AOS carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 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 AOS over WST?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. AOS leads Value by 40 points; WST leads Risk Resilience by 16 points; WST leads Momentum by 14 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AOS or WST?
Analyst price targets imply +28.7% upside for AOS and +10.5% for WST, so the Street currently favors AOS. 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, AOS or WST?
AOS is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. AOS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 40 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, AOS or WST?
WST 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, AOS or WST?
WST on the Momentum factor, by 14 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, AOS or WST?
WST is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. WST on Risk Resilience, by 16 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 AOS more profitable than WST?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 38.6% vs 36.8%; operating margin 17.6% vs 20.6%; ttm roe 27% vs 18.5%. AOS leads on two measures and WST 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 AOS's lead over WST getting stronger or weaker?
AOS lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 8 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the AOS vs WST verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: WST closes the Value gap — currently 40 points behind, the largest single contributor to AOS's edge; WST's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; AOS's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 4 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 AOS and WST?
AOS: 2 bullish / 4 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. WST: 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 AOS is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On WST it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare AOS and WST 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.