AVGO vs IEI Stock Comparison
Broadcom Inc. vs iShares 3-7 Year Treasury Bond ETF
IEI leads
IEI leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from AVGO.
Fragile: 4 of 4 evidence groups support IEI, and the lead recently changed hands.
Broadcom Inc.
iShares 3-7 Year Treasury Bond ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors IEI over AVGO, 52 versus 47 as of Sep 5, 2026. IEI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and value, while AVGO holds the stronger quality profile. IEI also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 4 covered evidence groups favor IEI today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. IEI lead: Reversed — AVGO led by 5 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; IEI now leads by 5.
Compare Broadcom Inc. and iShares 3-7 Year Treasury Bond ETF across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare AVGO and IEI 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.
- Risk Resilience15%52 vs 85IEI +33
- Quality30%85 vs 62AVGO +23
- Value30%30 vs 45IEI +15
- Momentum25%20 vs 27IEI +7
4 of 4 evidence groups favor IEI. IEI’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and value; AVGO keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-03, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-02.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1
New signals
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.79%)
Largest factor move: Momentum +2
No new signals fired.
IEI's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AVGO and IEI both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
IEI (iShares 3-7 Year Treasury Bond ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and value.
AVGO (Broadcom Inc.): the counter-case, on quality — but at materially higher volatility, 36.2% against 3.3%.
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
IEIIEI on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
IEIIEI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 points.
Momentum
IEIIEI on the Momentum factor, by 7 points.
Lower downside
IEIIEI on Risk Resilience, by 33 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | AVGO | IEI | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +40.1% | — | Level |
| Target dispersion | +36.3% | — | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | — | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 15 | — | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 4 covered evidence groups favor IEI. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | IEI | 47 vs 52 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | IEI | Value 30 vs 45 |
| Technicals | IEI | Price vs 50-day -6.8% vs -0.8%; vs 200-day -3.4% vs -2.1% |
| Risk Resilience | IEI | Risk Resilience 52 vs 85 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AVGO and IEI 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 5 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 4 of 4 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has swung materially session to session. (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)
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 IEI.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 22 – Sep 3IEI lead: Reversed — AVGO led by 5 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; IEI now leads by 5.
- Today
- IEI +5
- 47 vs 52
- 7 sessions ago
- IEI +10
- 45 vs 55
- 30 sessions ago
- AVGO +5
- 62 vs 57
- 90 sessions ago
- IEI +8
- 49 vs 57
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Aug 18 when IEI 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 / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (3.87%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.79%)
0 bullish / 5 bearish / 2 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (1.37%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
AVGO is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
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 up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.21%, AIQ -1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.04%, 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 Risk Resilience gap — currently 33 points behind, the largest single contributor to IEI's edge.
- 2AVGO's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3IEI starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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
Split| Metric | AVGO | IEI |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 14.9% | — |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 26.5% | — |
| Gross margin | 67% | — |
| Operating margin | 43.7% | — |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 36.4% | — |
| Debt to equity | 0.74 | — |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | AVGO | IEI |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -3.9% | -0.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -15.1% | -0.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -14.7% | -1.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 7.3% | -3.1% |
| Year to date | 3.2% | -2.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 19.8% | -2.9% |
Technicals
IEI has the stronger structure| Metric | AVGO | IEI |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 28.4 | 33.1 |
| ADX (14) | 22.7 | 13.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | -6.8% | -0.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | -3.4% | -2.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 36.2% | 3.3% |
Risk
IEI is the more resilient| Metric | AVGO | IEI |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.15 | 0.05 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.51 | -2.17 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.76 | -3.05 |
| Max drawdown | -28.9% | -4.3% |
| Current drawdown | -25.8% | -4.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 48.5% | 3.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.4% | -0.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AVGO or IEI?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, IEI is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 52 against AVGO's 47. The edge comes from risk resilience and value. 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 IEI the better buy right now?
IEI carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor IEI over AVGO?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. IEI leads Risk Resilience by 33 points; AVGO leads Quality by 23 points; IEI leads Value by 15 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AVGO or IEI?
Analyst price targets imply +40.1% upside for AVGO and not covered for IEI. 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, AVGO or IEI?
IEI is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. IEI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 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 IEI?
Growth figures are not covered for both names. 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 IEI?
IEI on the Momentum factor, by 7 points. Momentum carries 25% of 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 IEI?
IEI is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. IEI on Risk Resilience, by 33 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is AVGO more profitable than IEI?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is IEI's lead over AVGO getting stronger or weaker?
IEI lead: Reversed — AVGO led by 5 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; IEI now leads by 5. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-22 and 2026-09-03. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-18, when IEI moved ahead of AVGO.
What would change the AVGO vs IEI verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: AVGO closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 33 points behind, the largest single contributor to IEI's edge; AVGO's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; IEI starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about AVGO and IEI?
AVGO: 2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. IEI: 0 bullish / 5 bearish / 2 neutral. 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 IEI it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.