AQN vs AVGO Stock Comparison
Compare AQN and AVGO across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between AQN and AVGO?
AVGO leads the current stock comparison as Broadcom Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Algonquin Power & Utilities Corp. vs Broadcom Inc.
AVGO leads
AVGO leads by 9 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 1 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support AVGO, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Algonquin Power & Utilities Corp.
Broadcom Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors AVGO over AQN, 52 versus 43 as of Sep 11, 2026. AVGO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while AQN holds the stronger value profile. AVGO also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor AVGO today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. AVGO lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 9 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Algonquin Power & Utilities Corp. and Broadcom 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 AQN and AVGO 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.
- Quality32 vs 85AVGO +53
- Value59 vs 30AQN +29
- Momentum25 vs 39AVGO +14
- Risk Resilience61 vs 52AQN +9
4 of 6 evidence groups favor AVGO. AVGO’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; AQN keeps a meaningful value 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: Risk Resilience -2
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (1.7%)
Largest factor move: Momentum -3
No new signals fired.
AVGO's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AQN and AVGO both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
AVGO (Broadcom Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
AQN (Algonquin Power & Utilities Corp.): the counter-case, on value, risk resilience, valuation.
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
AVGOAVGO on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
AVGOAVGO on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
AQNAQN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 29 points.
Momentum
AVGOAVGO on the Momentum factor, by 14 points.
Lower downside
AQNAQN on Risk Resilience, by 9 points.
Analyst upside
AVGOAVGO 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 | AQN | AVGO | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +22.4% | +39.4% | AVGO has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +49.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 17 | 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 AVGO. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | AVGO | 43 vs 52 |
| Fundamentals | AVGO | revenue growth -31.4% vs 14.9%; EPS growth -98.8% vs 26.5%; TTM ROE 3.2% vs 36.4%; gross margin 45.4% vs 67%; operating margin 20.5% vs 43.7% |
| Valuation | AQN | Value 59 vs 30 |
| Technicals | AVGO | Price vs 50-day -7.7% vs -5.5%; vs 200-day -10.8% vs -2.5% |
| Risk Resilience | AQN | Risk Resilience 61 vs 52 |
| Analyst expectations | AVGO | Target upside 22.4% vs 39.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AQN and AVGO 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 9 points.
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (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 AVGO.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10AVGO lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 9 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- AVGO +9
- 43 vs 52
- 7 sessions ago
- AVGO +4
- 43 vs 47
- 30 sessions ago
- AVGO +1
- 44 vs 45
- 90 sessions ago
- AVGO +9
- 41 vs 50
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Aug 31 when AVGO moved ahead of AQN.
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 / 5 bearish, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (6.25%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (3.55%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
AVGO 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 -2.21%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.32%, 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.
- 1AQN closes the Quality gap — currently 53 points behind, the largest single contributor to AVGO's edge.
- 2AQN's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3AVGO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 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
AVGO leads on balance| Metric | AQN | AVGO |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -31.4% | 14.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -98.8% | 26.5% |
| Gross margin | 45.4% | 67% |
| Operating margin | 20.5% | 43.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 3.2% | 36.4% |
| Debt to equity | 1.44 | 0.74 |
Performance
AVGO leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | AQN | AVGO |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -3.6% | -1.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -5.9% | -13.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -8.1% | -3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -13.5% | 5.6% |
| Year to date | -9.3% | 4.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -3.6% | 6.9% |
Technicals
AVGO has the stronger structure| Metric | AQN | AVGO |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 20.9 | 47.7 |
| ADX (14) | 11.8 | 23.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | -7.7% | -5.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | -10.8% | -2.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 16.8% | 37.6% |
Risk
AQN is the more resilient| Metric | AQN | AVGO |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.31 | 2.16 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.15 | 0.3 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.19 | 0.44 |
| Max drawdown | -22.2% | -28.9% |
| Current drawdown | -22.2% | -25.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 25.7% | 47.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.8% | -4.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AQN or AVGO?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, AVGO is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 52 against AQN's 43. The edge comes from quality and momentum. AQN is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 AQN or AVGO the better buy right now?
AVGO 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 AVGO over AQN?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. AVGO leads Quality by 53 points; AQN leads Value by 29 points; AVGO leads Momentum by 14 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AQN or AVGO?
Analyst price targets imply +22.4% upside for AQN and +39.4% for AVGO, so the Street currently favors AVGO. 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, AQN or AVGO?
AQN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. AQN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 29 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, AQN or AVGO?
AVGO 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, AQN or AVGO?
AVGO 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, AQN or AVGO?
AQN is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. AQN on Risk Resilience, by 9 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 AQN more profitable than AVGO?
AVGO leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 45.4% vs 67%; operating margin 20.5% vs 43.7%; ttm roe 3.2% vs 36.4%.
Is AVGO's lead over AQN getting stronger or weaker?
AVGO lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 9 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-31, when AVGO moved ahead of AQN.
What would change the AQN vs AVGO verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: AQN closes the Quality gap — currently 53 points behind, the largest single contributor to AVGO's edge; AQN's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; AVGO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 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 AQN and AVGO?
AQN: 2 bullish / 5 bearish, conflicted. AVGO: 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 AQN is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On AVGO it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare AQN and AVGO 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.