ARQQ vs LUNR Stock Comparison
Compare ARQQ and LUNR across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between ARQQ and LUNR?
LUNR leads the current stock comparison as Intuitive Machines, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Arqit Quantum Inc. vs Intuitive Machines, Inc.
LUNR leads
LUNR leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 10 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors ARQQ on target upside.
Fragile: 1 of 6 evidence groups support LUNR, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Arqit Quantum Inc.
Intuitive Machines, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors LUNR over ARQQ, 43 versus 41 as of Sep 11, 2026. LUNR's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while ARQQ holds the stronger momentum profile. LUNR also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors ARQQ. 1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor LUNR today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. LUNR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 2 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Arqit Quantum Inc. and Intuitive Machines, 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 ARQQ and LUNR 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.
- Quality33 vs 72LUNR +39
- Momentum60 vs 24ARQQ +36
- Risk Resilience39 vs 32ARQQ +7
- Value34 vs 36Even
1 of 6 evidence groups favor LUNR. LUNR’s edge is concentrated in quality; ARQQ 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 -2
New signals
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
LUNR's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ARQQ and LUNR both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
LUNR (Intuitive Machines, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
ARQQ (Arqit Quantum Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, risk resilience, technicals.
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
LUNRLUNR on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
LUNRLUNR on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
ARQQARQQ on the Momentum factor, by 36 points.
Lower downside
ARQQARQQ on Risk Resilience, by 7 points.
Analyst upside
ARQQARQQ on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors LUNR, analyst targets favor ARQQ. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | ARQQ | LUNR | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +199.3% | +169.5% | ARQQ has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +126.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 6 | 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
1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor LUNR. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 41 vs 43 |
| Fundamentals | LUNRon balance | revenue growth 34.6% vs 10.4%; EPS growth -67.2% vs -16%; TTM ROE -183.7% vs 29.8%; gross margin 9.3% vs 27.3%; operating margin -48.6% vs -27.5% — LUNR takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 34 vs 36 |
| Technicals | ARQQ | Price vs 50-day -1.7% vs -8.3%; vs 200-day 5.9% vs -26.5% |
| Risk Resilience | ARQQ | Risk Resilience 39 vs 32 |
| Analyst expectations | ARQQ | Target upside 199.3% vs 169.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ARQQ and LUNR 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 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 1 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. (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 LUNR.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10LUNR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 2 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- LUNR +2
- 41 vs 43
- 7 sessions ago
- LUNR +5
- 38 vs 43
- 30 sessions ago
- LUNR +10
- 44 vs 54
- 90 sessions ago
- LUNR +1
- 40 vs 41
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Jun 16 when ARQQ moved ahead of LUNR.
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 / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (4.90%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
1 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (27.01%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
LUNR 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 -2.58%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.85%, 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.
- 1ARQQ closes the Quality gap — currently 39 points behind, the largest single contributor to LUNR's edge.
- 2ARQQ's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3LUNR's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 3 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 8 points over 30 sessions, and a further 2-point move would eliminate LUNR'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
LUNR leads on balance| Metric | ARQQ | LUNR |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 34.6% | 10.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -67.2% | -16% |
| Gross margin | 9.3% | 27.3% |
| Operating margin | -48.6% | -27.5% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -183.7% | 29.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.08 | -1.51 |
Performance
ARQQ leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | ARQQ | LUNR |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.2% | -1.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -13.2% | -13.7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 57.2% | -44.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 39.5% | -20.8% |
| Year to date | -5.9% | -9.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -22.7% | 73.2% |
Technicals
ARQQ has the stronger structure| Metric | ARQQ | LUNR |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 48.4 | 24.4 |
| ADX (14) | 13.5 | 19.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1.7% | -8.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | 5.9% | -26.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 72.1% | 71.1% |
Risk
ARQQ is the more resilient| Metric | ARQQ | LUNR |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 4.07 | 3.51 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.26 | 1 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.48 | 2 |
| Max drawdown | -79.8% | -75.1% |
| Current drawdown | -64.7% | -68% |
| Annualized volatility | 116% | 112% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -9.9% | -9.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ARQQ or LUNR?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, LUNR is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 43 against ARQQ's 41. The edge comes from quality. ARQQ 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 ARQQ or LUNR the better buy right now?
LUNR carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 1 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor LUNR over ARQQ?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. LUNR leads Quality by 39 points; ARQQ leads Momentum by 36 points; ARQQ leads Risk Resilience by 7 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ARQQ or LUNR?
Analyst price targets imply +199.3% upside for ARQQ and +169.5% for LUNR, so the Street currently favors ARQQ. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors LUNR. 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, ARQQ or LUNR?
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, ARQQ or LUNR?
LUNR 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, ARQQ or LUNR?
ARQQ on the Momentum factor, by 36 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, ARQQ or LUNR?
ARQQ is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ARQQ on Risk Resilience, by 7 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 ARQQ more profitable than LUNR?
LUNR leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 9.3% vs 27.3%; operating margin -48.6% vs -27.5%; ttm roe -183.7% vs 29.8%.
Is LUNR's lead over ARQQ getting stronger or weaker?
LUNR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 2 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 once in that window, most recently on 2026-06-16, when ARQQ moved ahead of LUNR.
What would change the ARQQ vs LUNR verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ARQQ closes the Quality gap — currently 39 points behind, the largest single contributor to LUNR's edge; ARQQ's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; LUNR's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 3 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 8 points over 30 sessions, and a further 2-point move would eliminate LUNR's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about ARQQ and LUNR?
ARQQ: 2 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. LUNR: 1 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 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 ARQQ is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On LUNR it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare ARQQ and LUNR 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.