ATI vs TXT Stock Comparison
Compare ATI and TXT across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between ATI and TXT?
TXT leads the current stock comparison as Textron Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
ATI Inc. vs Textron Inc.
TXT leads
TXT leads by 9 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Risk Resilience, and the lead has widened from 1 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support TXT, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TXT over ATI, 49 versus 40 as of Sep 11, 2026. TXT's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and risk resilience, while ATI holds the stronger quality profile. TXT also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TXT today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. TXT lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 9 points over 30 sessions.
Compare ATI Inc. and Textron 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 ATI and TXT 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.
- Value27 vs 71TXT +44
- Quality50 vs 39ATI +11
- Momentum33 vs 24ATI +9
- Risk Resilience61 vs 69TXT +8
4 of 6 evidence groups favor TXT. TXT’s edge is concentrated in value and risk resilience; ATI keeps a meaningful quality 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 -15
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience +1
No new signals fired.
TXT's lead widened by 5 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — ATI and TXT both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TXT (Textron Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and risk resilience.
ATI (ATI Inc.): the counter-case, on quality, momentum, fundamentals — but at materially higher volatility, 33.5% against 18.4%.
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
TXTTXT on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
ATIATI on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
TXTTXT on the peer-relative Value factor, by 44 points.
Momentum
ATIATI on the Momentum factor, by 9 points.
Lower downside
TXTTXT on Risk Resilience, by 8 points.
Analyst upside
TXTTXT 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 | ATI | TXT | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +9.5% | +23.2% | TXT has more room |
| Target dispersion | +49.6% | +14% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 5 | 2 | 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 TXT. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | TXT | 40 vs 49 |
| Fundamentals | ATI | revenue growth 9.5% vs 3.6%; EPS growth 27.6% vs 13.6%; TTM ROE 26.6% vs 11.9%; gross margin 23.4% vs 12%; operating margin 15.3% vs 8.3% |
| Valuation | TXT | Value 27 vs 71 |
| Technicals | ATI | Price vs 50-day -2% vs -7.1%; vs 200-day 25.3% vs -12% |
| Risk Resilience | TXT | Risk Resilience 61 vs 69 |
| Analyst expectations | TXT | Target upside 9.5% vs 23.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of ATI and TXT 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 TXT.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10TXT lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 9 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TXT +9
- 40 vs 49
- 7 sessions ago
- TXT +6
- 43 vs 49
- 30 sessions ago
- TXT +1
- 51 vs 52
- 90 sessions ago
- TXT +16
- 41 vs 57
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Aug 18 when TXT moved ahead of ATI.
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 / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (26.68%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.07%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 4 bearish, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (3.29%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (0.4%)
TXT 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 and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -0.12%, AIQ -5 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +2.27%, 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.
- 1ATI closes the Value gap — currently 44 points behind, the largest single contributor to TXT's edge.
- 2ATI's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3TXT's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 4 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
ATI leads on balance| Metric | ATI | TXT |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 9.5% | 3.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 27.6% | 13.6% |
| Gross margin | 23.4% | 12% |
| Operating margin | 15.3% | 8.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 26.6% | 11.9% |
| Debt to equity | 1.17 | 0.52 |
Performance
ATI leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | ATI | TXT |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.3% | -0.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -13.6% | -10.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 8.5% | -13.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 26.4% | -15.1% |
| Year to date | 73.4% | -8.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 156.8% | -3.1% |
Technicals
ATI has the stronger structure| Metric | ATI | TXT |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 39.7 | 27.5 |
| ADX (14) | 14.7 | 37.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -2% | -7.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 25.3% | -12% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 33.5% | 18.4% |
Risk
TXT is the more resilient| Metric | ATI | TXT |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.7 | 0.73 |
| Sharpe ratio | 2.45 | -0.08 |
| Sortino ratio | 4.51 | -0.11 |
| Max drawdown | -18.6% | -21.5% |
| Current drawdown | -14.1% | -21.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 42% | 26.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.6% | -2.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, ATI or TXT?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TXT is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 49 against ATI's 40. The edge comes from value and risk resilience. ATI 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 ATI or TXT the better buy right now?
TXT 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 TXT over ATI?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. TXT leads Value by 44 points; ATI leads Quality by 11 points; ATI leads Momentum by 9 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, ATI or TXT?
Analyst price targets imply +9.5% upside for ATI and +23.2% for TXT, so the Street currently favors TXT. 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, ATI or TXT?
TXT is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. TXT on the peer-relative Value factor, by 44 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, ATI or TXT?
ATI 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, ATI or TXT?
ATI on the Momentum factor, by 9 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, ATI or TXT?
TXT is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TXT on Risk Resilience, by 8 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 ATI more profitable than TXT?
ATI leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 23.4% vs 12%; operating margin 15.3% vs 8.3%; ttm roe 26.6% vs 11.9%.
Is TXT's lead over ATI getting stronger or weaker?
TXT 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 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-18, when TXT moved ahead of ATI.
What would change the ATI vs TXT verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ATI closes the Value gap — currently 44 points behind, the largest single contributor to TXT's edge; ATI's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; TXT's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 4 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 ATI and TXT?
ATI: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. TXT: 1 bullish / 4 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 ATI is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On TXT it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare ATI and TXT 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.