AS vs AZO Stock Comparison
AZO currently leads AS in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 55 vs 54. The clearest difference is momentum, while AS has the stronger quality profile.
What is the main difference between AS and AZO?
AZO leads the current stock comparison as AutoZone, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Amer Sports, Inc. vs AutoZone, Inc.
AZO leads
AZO leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value. Wall Street currently favors AS on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support AZO, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Amer Sports, Inc.
AutoZone, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors AZO over AS, 55 versus 54 as of Oct 21, 2026. AZO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while AS holds the stronger quality profile. AZO also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors AS. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor AZO today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. AZO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Amer Sports, Inc. and AutoZone, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price return from daily closes; distributions are not included.
Price return comparison
Growth of $10,000, price only
Split-adjusted closes only. Distributions are excluded, which understates the return of any fund or stock that pays them.
Compare AS and AZO 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.
- Momentum73 vs 88AZO +15
- Quality63 vs 53AS +10
- Risk Resilience49 vs 40AS +9
- Value30 vs 37AZO +7
3 of 6 evidence groups favor AZO. AZO’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; AS keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience +1
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +2
New signals
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
AZO's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AS and AZO both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
AZO (AutoZone, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
AS (Amer Sports, Inc.): the counter-case, on quality, risk resilience, 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
AZOAZO on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
AZOAZO on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
AZOAZO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 7 points.
Momentum
AZOAZO on the Momentum factor, by 15 points.
Lower downside
ASAS on Risk Resilience, by 9 points.
Analyst upside
ASAS on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors AZO, analyst targets favor AS. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | AS | AZO | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +54.5% | +15.2% | AS has more room |
| Target dispersion | +67.8% | +33.8% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 10 | 16 | 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
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor AZO. 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 | 54 vs 55 |
| Fundamentals | AZOon balance | revenue growth -16.1% vs 13.3%; EPS growth -37.9% vs 37.7%; TTM ROE 8.7% vs -80.4%; gross margin 59.8% vs 51.8%; operating margin 12.4% vs 18% — AZO takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | AZO | Value 30 vs 37 |
| Technicals | AZO | Price vs 50-day 1% vs 7.3%; vs 200-day -11% vs -4.7% |
| Risk Resilience | AS | Risk Resilience 49 vs 40 |
| Analyst expectations | AS | Target upside 54.5% vs 15.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AS and AZO 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 1 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 AZO.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20AZO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- AZO +1
- 54 vs 55
- 7 sessions ago
- AZO +1
- 53 vs 54
- 30 sessions ago
- AZO +3
- 44 vs 47
- 90 sessions ago
- AZO +3
- 39 vs 42
The lead changed hands 9 times in this window, most recently on Oct 13 when AS moved ahead of AZO.
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 / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only AS
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
2 bullish / 3 bearish, conflicted
Only AZO
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
Both carry 4 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, Keltner Channel Breakout, RSI Overbought, MACD Bullish Crossover.
AZO 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 down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -2.41%, AIQ +1 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.11%, 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.
- 1AS closes the Momentum gap — currently 15 points behind, the largest single contributor to AZO's edge.
- 2AS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3AZO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 3 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
AZO leads on balance| Metric | AS | AZO |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -16.1% | 13.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -37.9% | 37.7% |
| Gross margin | 59.8% | 51.8% |
| Operating margin | 12.4% | 18% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 8.7% | -80.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.16 | -4.54 |
Performance
AZO leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | AS | AZO |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 3.8% | 7.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 9.6% | 9.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -11.8% | 5.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -16.2% | -12.4% |
| Year to date | -18.8% | -6.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -1.1% | -21.2% |
Technicals
AZO has the stronger structure| Metric | AS | AZO |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 77.7 | 75.4 |
| ADX (14) | 23.5 | 16.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1% | 7.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | -11% | -4.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 28.7% | 29.1% |
Risk
AS is the more resilient| Metric | AS | AZO |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.49 | 0.15 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.05 | -0.78 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.1 | -1.04 |
| Max drawdown | -37.4% | -30.7% |
| Current drawdown | -27.8% | -21.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 39.7% | 30.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.8% | -3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AS or AZO?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, AZO is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 55 against AS's 54. The edge comes from momentum and value. AS is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 AS or AZO the better buy right now?
AZO carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor AZO over AS?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. AZO leads Momentum by 15 points; AS leads Quality by 10 points; AS leads Risk Resilience by 9 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AS or AZO?
Analyst price targets imply +54.5% upside for AS and +15.2% for AZO, so the Street currently favors AS. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors AZO. 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, AS or AZO?
AZO is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. AZO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 7 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, AS or AZO?
AZO 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, AS or AZO?
AZO on the Momentum factor, by 15 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, AS or AZO?
AS is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. AS 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 AS more profitable than AZO?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 59.8% vs 51.8%; operating margin 12.4% vs 18%; ttm roe 8.7% vs -80.4%. AS leads on two measures and AZO 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 AZO's lead over AS getting stronger or weaker?
AZO lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 9 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-13, when AS moved ahead of AZO.
What would change the AS vs AZO verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: AS closes the Momentum gap — currently 15 points behind, the largest single contributor to AZO's edge; AS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; AZO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 3 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 AS and AZO?
AS: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. AZO: 2 bullish / 3 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 AS is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On AZO it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare AS and AZO 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.