APA vs AR Stock Comparison
Compare APA and AR across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between APA and AR?
APA leads the current stock comparison as APA Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
APA Corporation vs Antero Resources Corporation
APA leads
APA leads by 8 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 11 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors AR on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support APA, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
APA Corporation
Antero Resources Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors APA over AR, 60 versus 52 as of Sep 11, 2026. APA's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while AR holds the stronger momentum profile. APA also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors AR. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor APA today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. APA lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 11 to 8 points over 30 sessions.
Compare APA Corporation and Antero Resources Corporation 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 APA and AR 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.
- Value62 vs 41APA +21
- Quality65 vs 47APA +18
- Momentum62 vs 78AR +16
- Risk Resilience43 vs 44Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor APA. APA’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; AR keeps a meaningful momentum 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 -4
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience -1
New signals
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
APA's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — APA and AR both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
APA (APA Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
AR (Antero Resources Corporation): the counter-case, on momentum, 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
APAAPA on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
APAAPA on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
APAAPA on the peer-relative Value factor, by 21 points.
Momentum
ARAR on the Momentum factor, by 16 points.
Lower downside
ARAR carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
ARAR on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors APA, analyst targets favor AR. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | APA | AR | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -0.7% | +34.2% | AR has more room |
| Target dispersion | +47.3% | +36.8% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 12 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor APA. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | APA | 60 vs 52 |
| Fundamentals | APAon balance | revenue growth 3.1% vs -28.2%; EPS growth 67.5% vs -48%; TTM ROE 26.3% vs 13.9%; gross margin 38.8% vs 26%; operating margin 11.8% vs 21% — APA takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | APA | Value 62 vs 41 |
| Technicals | APA | Price vs 50-day 16.1% vs 6%; vs 200-day 31.4% vs 7.8% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 43 vs 44 |
| Analyst expectations | AR | Target upside -0.7% vs 34.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of APA and AR 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 8 points.
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (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)
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 APA.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10APA lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 11 to 8 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- APA +8
- 60 vs 52
- 7 sessions ago
- APA +8
- 60 vs 52
- 30 sessions ago
- APA +11
- 64 vs 53
- 90 sessions ago
- APA +7
- 55 vs 48
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.
4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (13.71%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.25%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
APA 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.
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.45%, AIQ -1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -1.89%, 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.
- 1AR closes the Value gap — currently 21 points behind, the largest single contributor to APA's edge.
- 2AR's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3APA's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 8-point move would eliminate APA's advantage entirely.
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
APA leads on balance| Metric | APA | AR |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 3.1% | -28.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 67.5% | -48% |
| Gross margin | 38.8% | 26% |
| Operating margin | 11.8% | 21% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 26.3% | 13.9% |
| Debt to equity | 0.55 | 0.55 |
Performance
APA leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | APA | AR |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.4% | -1.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 11.4% | 4.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 17.2% | 9.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 35.1% | -1.3% |
| Year to date | 81.5% | 13.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 100% | 22% |
Technicals
APA has the stronger structure| Metric | APA | AR |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 50.6 | 72.1 |
| ADX (14) | 25.3 | 23.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 16.1% | 6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 31.4% | 7.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 34% | 22.4% |
Risk
Split| Metric | APA | AR |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.77 | -0.16 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.71 | 0.61 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.79 | 0.96 |
| Max drawdown | -28.2% | -26.4% |
| Current drawdown | -0.7% | -13.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 46.3% | 37.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.1% | -4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, APA or AR?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, APA is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 60 against AR's 52. The edge comes from value and quality. AR 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 APA or AR the better buy right now?
APA carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor APA over AR?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. APA leads Value by 21 points; APA leads Quality by 18 points; AR leads Momentum by 16 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, APA or AR?
Analyst price targets imply -0.7% upside for APA and +34.2% for AR, so the Street currently favors AR. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors APA. 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, APA or AR?
APA is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. APA on the peer-relative Value factor, by 21 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, APA or AR?
APA 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, APA or AR?
AR on the Momentum factor, by 16 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, APA or AR?
AR is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. AR 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 APA more profitable than AR?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 38.8% vs 26%; operating margin 11.8% vs 21%; ttm roe 26.3% vs 13.9%. APA leads on two measures and AR 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 APA's lead over AR getting stronger or weaker?
APA lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 11 to 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 APA vs AR verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: AR closes the Value gap — currently 21 points behind, the largest single contributor to APA's edge; AR's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; APA's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 8-point move would eliminate APA's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about APA and AR?
APA: 4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. AR: 1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 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 APA is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On AR it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare APA and AR 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.