APA vs ARCH Stock Comparison
ARCH currently leads APA in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 69 vs 65. The clearest difference is risk resilience.
What is the main difference between APA and ARCH?
ARCH leads the current stock comparison as Arch Resources, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
APA Corporation vs Arch Resources, Inc.
ARCH leads
ARCH leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 13 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 3 of 5 evidence groups support ARCH, and its lead is narrowing.
APA Corporation
Arch Resources, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors ARCH over APA, 69 versus 65 as of Oct 31, 2026. ARCH's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and quality. 3 of 5 covered evidence groups favor ARCH today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. ARCH lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 13 to 9 points over 30 sessions.
Compare APA Corporation and Arch Resources, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare APA and ARCH 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 Resilience45 vs 85ARCH +40
- Quality65 vs 70ARCH +5
- Value62 vs 59Even
3 of 5 evidence groups favor ARCH. ARCH’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and quality.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
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.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session.
ARCH's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — APA and ARCH both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
ARCH (Arch Resources, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and quality.
APA (APA Corporation): the counter-case, on fundamentals.
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
ARCHARCH on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
APAAPA on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
ARCHARCH on Risk Resilience, by 40 points.
Analyst upside
ARCHARCH 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 | APA | ARCH | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -12.1% | +18.7% | ARCH has more room |
| Target dispersion | +56% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 15 | 1 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 5 covered evidence groups favor ARCH. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | ARCH | 65 vs 69 |
| Fundamentals | APAon balance | revenue growth 3.1% vs 1.5%; EPS growth 67.5% vs -141.5%; TTM ROE 26.3% vs 32.6%; gross margin 38.8% vs 20.9%; operating margin 11.8% vs 17.4% — APA takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 62 vs 59 |
| Technicals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Risk Resilience | ARCH | Risk Resilience 45 vs 85 |
| Analyst expectations | ARCH | Target upside -12.1% vs 18.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of APA and ARCH 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 4 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (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 ARCH.
How the comparison changed
67 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Sep 5ARCH lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 13 to 9 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- ARCH +9
- 60 vs 69
- 7 sessions ago
- ARCH +15
- 62 vs 77
- 30 sessions ago
- ARCH +13
- 64 vs 77
- 90 sessions ago
- ARCH +25
- 52 vs 77
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.
6 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (20.70%)
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
No signal data
APA 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 +2.54%, 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.
- 1APA closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 40 points behind, the largest single contributor to ARCH's edge.
- 2APA's RSI Overbought resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3ARCH starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 4-point move would eliminate ARCH'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 | ARCH |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 3.1% | 1.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 67.5% | -141.5% |
| Gross margin | 38.8% | 20.9% |
| Operating margin | 11.8% | 17.4% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 26.3% | 32.6% |
| Debt to equity | 0.55 | 0.1 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | APA | ARCH |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 3% | — |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 23% | — |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 40.7% | — |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 26.8% | — |
| Year to date | 107.3% | — |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 114.5% | — |
Technicals
Split| Metric | APA | ARCH |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 77.3 | — |
| ADX (14) | 32.6 | — |
| Price vs 50-day | 16.8% | — |
| Price vs 200-day | 36.4% | — |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 31% | — |
Risk
ARCH is the more resilient| Metric | APA | ARCH |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.97 | — |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.97 | — |
| Sortino ratio | 3.18 | — |
| Max drawdown | -28.2% | — |
| Current drawdown | -1.5% | — |
| Annualized volatility | 44.4% | — |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.8% | — |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, APA or ARCH?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, ARCH is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 69 against APA's 65. The edge comes from risk resilience and 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 APA or ARCH the better buy right now?
ARCH carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 5 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor ARCH over APA?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. ARCH leads Risk Resilience by 40 points; ARCH leads Quality by 5 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, APA or ARCH?
Analyst price targets imply -12.1% upside for APA and +18.7% for ARCH, so the Street currently favors ARCH. 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, APA or ARCH?
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, APA or ARCH?
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 ARCH?
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, APA or ARCH?
ARCH is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ARCH on Risk Resilience, by 40 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 APA more profitable than ARCH?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 38.8% vs 20.9%; operating margin 11.8% vs 17.4%; ttm roe 26.3% vs 32.6%. APA leads on one measure and ARCH on two measures, 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 ARCH's lead over APA getting stronger or weaker?
ARCH lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 13 to 9 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 67 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-09-05. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the APA vs ARCH verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: APA closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 40 points behind, the largest single contributor to ARCH's edge; APA's RSI Overbought resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; ARCH starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 4-point move would eliminate ARCH's advantage entirely.
Compare APA and ARCH 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.