AVGO vs AVTR Stock Comparison
Compare AVGO and AVTR across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between AVGO and AVTR?
AVTR leads the current stock comparison as Avantor, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Broadcom Inc. vs Avantor, Inc.
AVTR leads
AVTR leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum, but the lead has narrowed from 13 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors AVGO on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support AVTR, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Broadcom Inc.
Avantor, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors AVTR over AVGO, 55 versus 52 as of Sep 13, 2026. AVTR's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum, while AVGO holds the stronger quality profile. AVTR also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors AVGO. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor AVTR today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. AVTR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 13 to 3 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Broadcom Inc. and Avantor, 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 AVGO and AVTR 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.
- Quality85 vs 34AVGO +51
- Value30 vs 64AVTR +34
- Momentum38 vs 66AVTR +28
- Risk Resilience53 vs 60AVTR +7
3 of 6 evidence groups favor AVTR. AVTR’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum; AVGO keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-11, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-10.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1
New signals
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -4
No new signals fired.
AVTR's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AVGO and AVTR both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
AVTR (Avantor, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and momentum.
AVGO (Broadcom Inc.): the counter-case, on quality, fundamentals, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 37.5% against 31.8%.
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
AVTRAVTR on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
AVGOAVGO on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
AVTRAVTR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 34 points.
Momentum
AVTRAVTR on the Momentum factor, by 28 points.
Lower downside
AVTRAVTR on Risk Resilience, by 7 points.
Analyst upside
AVGOAVGO on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors AVTR, analyst targets favor AVGO. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | AVGO | AVTR | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +39.4% | -28.4% | AVGO has more room |
| Target dispersion | +49.5% | +66% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 17 | 9 | 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 AVTR. 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 | 52 vs 55 |
| Fundamentals | AVGO | revenue growth 14.9% vs 7%; EPS growth 26.5% vs -6.1%; TTM ROE 36.4% vs -10.3%; gross margin 67% vs 31.8%; operating margin 43.7% vs -4.4% |
| Valuation | AVTR | Value 30 vs 64 |
| Technicals | AVTR | Price vs 50-day -5.5% vs 13.9%; vs 200-day -2.2% vs 41.8% |
| Risk Resilience | AVTR | Risk Resilience 53 vs 60 |
| Analyst expectations | AVGO | Target upside 39.4% vs -28.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AVGO and AVTR 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 3 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 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)
- 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 AVTR.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 11AVTR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 13 to 3 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- AVTR +3
- 52 vs 55
- 7 sessions ago
- AVTR +11
- 47 vs 58
- 30 sessions ago
- AVTR +13
- 45 vs 58
- 90 sessions ago
- AVTR +1
- 54 vs 55
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Aug 14 when AVTR moved ahead of AVGO.
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
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (3.48%)
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (24.53%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
AVTR 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 +0.32%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -0.47%, 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.
- 1AVGO closes the Value gap — currently 34 points behind, the largest single contributor to AVTR's edge.
- 2AVGO generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active.
- 3AVTR's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 10 points over 30 sessions, and a further 3-point move would eliminate AVTR'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
AVGO leads on balance| Metric | AVGO | AVTR |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 14.9% | 7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 26.5% | -6.1% |
| Gross margin | 67% | 31.8% |
| Operating margin | 43.7% | -4.4% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 36.4% | -10.3% |
| Debt to equity | 0.74 | 0.66 |
Performance
AVTR leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | AVGO | AVTR |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.4% | -2.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -13.4% | 6.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -6.1% | 53.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 7.7% | 83.9% |
| Year to date | 4.6% | 29.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 7.5% | 15.4% |
Technicals
AVTR has the stronger structure| Metric | AVGO | AVTR |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 45.1 | 56.1 |
| ADX (14) | 23.3 | 46 |
| Price vs 50-day | -5.5% | 13.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | -2.2% | 41.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 37.5% | 31.8% |
Risk
AVTR is the more resilient| Metric | AVGO | AVTR |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.14 | 0.92 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.1 | 0.5 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.15 | 0.65 |
| Max drawdown | -28.9% | -52.5% |
| Current drawdown | -24.8% | -5.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 46.5% | 51.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.4% | -4.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AVGO or AVTR?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, AVTR is the stronger of the two as of Sep 13, 2026, scoring 55 against AVGO's 52. The edge comes from value and momentum. AVGO 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 AVGO or AVTR the better buy right now?
AVTR carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 13, 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 3 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor AVTR over AVGO?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. AVGO leads Quality by 51 points; AVTR leads Value by 34 points; AVTR leads Momentum by 28 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AVGO or AVTR?
Analyst price targets imply +39.4% upside for AVGO and -28.4% for AVTR, so the Street currently favors AVGO. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors AVTR. 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, AVGO or AVTR?
AVTR is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. AVTR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 34 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, AVGO or AVTR?
AVGO 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, AVGO or AVTR?
AVTR on the Momentum factor, by 28 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, AVGO or AVTR?
AVTR is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. AVTR 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 AVGO more profitable than AVTR?
AVGO leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 67% vs 31.8%; operating margin 43.7% vs -4.4%; ttm roe 36.4% vs -10.3%.
Is AVTR's lead over AVGO getting stronger or weaker?
AVTR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 13 to 3 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-11. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-14, when AVTR moved ahead of AVGO.
What would change the AVGO vs AVTR verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: AVGO closes the Value gap — currently 34 points behind, the largest single contributor to AVTR's edge; AVGO generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active; AVTR's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 10 points over 30 sessions, and a further 3-point move would eliminate AVTR's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about AVGO and AVTR?
AVGO: 2 bullish / 0 bearish. AVTR: 3 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 AVGO is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On AVTR it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare AVGO and AVTR 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.