ARES vs BAC Stock Comparison
BAC currently leads ARES in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 47 vs 40. The clearest difference is value, while ARES has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between ARES and BAC?
BAC leads the current stock comparison as Bank of America Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Ares Management Corporation vs Bank of America Corporation
BAC leads
BAC leads by 7 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Risk Resilience.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support BAC, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Ares Management Corporation
Bank of America Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors BAC over ARES, 47 versus 40 as of Oct 24, 2026. BAC's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and risk resilience, while ARES holds the stronger momentum profile. BAC also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BAC today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. BAC lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 7 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Ares Management Corporation and Bank of America Corporation 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 ARES and BAC 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.
- Value24 vs 57BAC +33
- Momentum54 vs 25ARES +29
- Risk Resilience40 vs 59BAC +19
- Quality43 vs 49BAC +6
4 of 6 evidence groups favor BAC. BAC’s edge is concentrated in value and risk resilience; ARES keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-23, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-22.
Largest factor move: Momentum -2, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 2 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
New signals
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
BAC's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ARES and BAC both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
BAC (Bank of America Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and risk resilience.
ARES (Ares Management Corporation): the counter-case, on momentum, fundamentals, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 32.6% against 21.5%.
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
BACBAC on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
ARESARES on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
BACBAC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 33 points.
Momentum
ARESARES on the Momentum factor, by 29 points.
Lower downside
BACBAC on Risk Resilience, by 19 points.
Analyst upside
BACBAC 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 | ARES | BAC | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +19.1% | +31.1% | BAC has more room |
| Target dispersion | +27.5% | +22.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 11 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | ARES | BAC |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 22.87% | 8.45% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $1.600 | $0.720 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $4.480 | $1.080 |
| Years increased | 5 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #8 | #133 |
ARES grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 22.87% a year against BAC's 8.45%. Neither company reduced its regular dividend in any year of the window.
Yield and payout ratio shown elsewhere on this page are current values, not part of the study window.
Split-adjusted regular dividends per share, 2020–2025, excluding special dividends. Research as of Sep 19, 2026.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BAC. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | BAC | 40 vs 47 |
| Fundamentals | ARESon balance | revenue growth -6.8% vs -3.3%; EPS growth -5.8% vs -23.8%; TTM ROE 15.2% vs 10.7%; gross margin 62.7% vs 60.4%; operating margin 23.2% vs 22.4% — ARES takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | BAC | Value 24 vs 57 |
| Technicals | ARES | Price vs 50-day -4.4% vs -12.4%; vs 200-day -3.1% vs -8.2% |
| Risk Resilience | BAC | Risk Resilience 40 vs 59 |
| Analyst expectations | BAC | Target upside 19.1% vs 31.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ARES and BAC 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 7 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 BAC.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 24 – Oct 23BAC lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 7 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- BAC +7
- 40 vs 47
- 7 sessions ago
- BAC +14
- 33 vs 47
- 30 sessions ago
- BAC +9
- 32 vs 41
- 90 sessions ago
- BAC +8
- 43 vs 51
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 / 0 bearish
Only ARES
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only BAC
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active.
BAC 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 -1.31%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.02%, 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.
- 1ARES closes the Value gap — currently 33 points behind, the largest single contributor to BAC's edge.
- 2ARES generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active.
- 3BAC's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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
ARES leads on balance| Metric | ARES | BAC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -6.8% | -3.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -5.8% | -23.8% |
| Gross margin | 62.7% | 60.4% |
| Operating margin | 23.2% | 22.4% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 15.2% | 10.7% |
| Debt to equity | 3.75 | 1.28 |
Performance
ARES leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | ARES | BAC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 8.7% | -1.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 0.1% | -10.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -4.4% | -17.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 5.9% | -2.9% |
| Year to date | -24.5% | -8.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -18.7% | -1.9% |
Technicals
ARES has the stronger structure| Metric | ARES | BAC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 59.2 | 27.8 |
| ADX (14) | 28.4 | 49.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -4.4% | -12.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | -3.1% | -8.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 32.6% | 21.5% |
Risk
BAC is the more resilient| Metric | ARES | BAC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.66 | 0.74 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.35 | -0.12 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.51 | -0.15 |
| Max drawdown | -45.9% | -22.3% |
| Current drawdown | -31.5% | -22% |
| Annualized volatility | 43.3% | 21.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4% | -2.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ARES or BAC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, BAC is the stronger of the two as of Oct 24, 2026, scoring 47 against ARES's 40. The edge comes from value and risk resilience. ARES 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 ARES or BAC the better buy right now?
BAC carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 24, 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 BAC over ARES?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. BAC leads Value by 33 points; ARES leads Momentum by 29 points; BAC leads Risk Resilience by 19 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ARES or BAC?
Analyst price targets imply +19.1% upside for ARES and +31.1% for BAC, so the Street currently favors BAC. 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, ARES or BAC?
BAC is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. BAC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 33 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, ARES or BAC?
ARES 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, ARES or BAC?
ARES on the Momentum factor, by 29 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, ARES or BAC?
BAC is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. BAC on Risk Resilience, by 19 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 ARES more profitable than BAC?
ARES leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 62.7% vs 60.4%; operating margin 23.2% vs 22.4%; ttm roe 15.2% vs 10.7%.
Is BAC's lead over ARES getting stronger or weaker?
BAC lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 7 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-24 and 2026-10-23. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the ARES vs BAC verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ARES closes the Value gap — currently 33 points behind, the largest single contributor to BAC's edge; ARES generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active; BAC's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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 ARES and BAC?
ARES: 2 bullish / 0 bearish. BAC: 2 bullish / 1 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 ARES is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On BAC it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare ARES and BAC 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.