AS vs WSM Stock Comparison
Compare AS and WSM across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between AS and WSM?
WSM leads the current stock comparison as Williams-Sonoma, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Amer Sports, Inc. vs Williams-Sonoma, Inc.
WSM leads
WSM leads by 9 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience, but the lead has narrowed from 16 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors AS on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support WSM, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Amer Sports, Inc.
Williams-Sonoma, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors WSM over AS, 49 versus 40 as of Sep 11, 2026. WSM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience. WSM also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors AS. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor WSM today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. WSM lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 16 to 9 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Amer Sports, Inc. and Williams-Sonoma, 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 AS and WSM 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.
- Quality63 vs 81WSM +18
- Risk Resilience41 vs 55WSM +14
- Momentum24 vs 30WSM +6
- Value30 vs 30Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor WSM. WSM’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience.
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 +1
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +3
No new signals fired.
WSM's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AS and WSM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
WSM (Williams-Sonoma, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
AS (Amer Sports, Inc.): the counter-case, on analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 36.8% against 21.4%.
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
WSMWSM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
WSMWSM on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
WSMWSM on the Momentum factor, by 6 points.
Lower downside
WSMWSM on Risk Resilience, by 14 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 WSM, analyst targets favor AS. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | AS | WSM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +83.2% | +3.1% | AS has more room |
| Target dispersion | +33.1% | +38.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 6 | 13 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor WSM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | WSM | 40 vs 49 |
| Fundamentals | WSMon balance | revenue growth -16.1% vs 8.5%; EPS growth -37.9% vs 47.2%; TTM ROE 8.7% vs 57.8%; gross margin 59.8% vs 47.2%; operating margin 12.4% vs 19.2% — WSM takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 30 vs 30 |
| Technicals | WSM | Price vs 50-day -16% vs -2.5%; vs 200-day -21.5% vs 9.1% |
| Risk Resilience | WSM | Risk Resilience 41 vs 55 |
| Analyst expectations | AS | Target upside 83.2% vs 3.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AS and WSM 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 moderate at 9 points.
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (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 WSM.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10WSM lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 16 to 9 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- WSM +9
- 40 vs 49
- 7 sessions ago
- WSM +7
- 41 vs 48
- 30 sessions ago
- WSM +16
- 41 vs 57
- 90 sessions ago
- WSM +12
- 41 vs 53
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Jul 21 when WSM moved ahead of AS.
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.
1 bullish / 5 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (6.01%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (13.15%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
WSM 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 +2.41%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +1.11%, 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 Quality gap — currently 18 points behind, the largest single contributor to WSM's edge.
- 2AS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3WSM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 7 points over 30 sessions, and a further 9-point move would eliminate WSM'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
WSM leads on balance| Metric | AS | WSM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -16.1% | 8.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -37.9% | 47.2% |
| Gross margin | 59.8% | 47.2% |
| Operating margin | 12.4% | 19.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 8.7% | 57.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.16 | 0.71 |
Performance
WSM leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | AS | WSM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -4% | 0.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -17% | -8.7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -18.8% | 8.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -17.9% | 20.4% |
| Year to date | -23.5% | 25.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -25.2% | 11.3% |
Technicals
WSM has the stronger structure| Metric | AS | WSM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 21.9 | 33.2 |
| ADX (14) | 33 | 18.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -16% | -2.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | -21.5% | 9.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 36.8% | 21.4% |
Risk
WSM is the more resilient| Metric | AS | WSM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.52 | 1.23 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.63 | 0.35 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.02 | 0.65 |
| Max drawdown | -34.7% | -23.6% |
| Current drawdown | -34.7% | -11.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 40.2% | 33.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.3% | -3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AS or WSM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, WSM is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 49 against AS's 40. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. 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 WSM the better buy right now?
WSM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor WSM over AS?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. WSM leads Quality by 18 points; WSM leads Risk Resilience by 14 points; WSM leads Momentum by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AS or WSM?
Analyst price targets imply +83.2% upside for AS and +3.1% for WSM, so the Street currently favors AS. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors WSM. 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 WSM?
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, AS or WSM?
WSM 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 WSM?
WSM on the Momentum factor, by 6 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 WSM?
WSM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. WSM on Risk Resilience, by 14 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 WSM?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 59.8% vs 47.2%; operating margin 12.4% vs 19.2%; ttm roe 8.7% vs 57.8%. AS leads on one measure and WSM 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 WSM's lead over AS getting stronger or weaker?
WSM lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 16 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 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-21, when WSM moved ahead of AS.
What would change the AS vs WSM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: AS closes the Quality gap — currently 18 points behind, the largest single contributor to WSM's edge; AS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; WSM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 7 points over 30 sessions, and a further 9-point move would eliminate WSM's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about AS and WSM?
AS: 1 bullish / 5 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. WSM: 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 AS is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On WSM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare AS and WSM 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.