AXP vs TROW Stock Comparison
TROW currently leads AXP in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 63 vs 57. The clearest difference is value, while AXP has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between AXP and TROW?
TROW leads the current stock comparison as T. Rowe Price Group, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
American Express Company vs T. Rowe Price Group, Inc.
TROW leads
TROW leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 13 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors AXP on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support TROW, its lead is narrowing, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
American Express Company
T. Rowe Price Group, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TROW over AXP, 63 versus 57 as of Oct 24, 2026. TROW's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while AXP holds the stronger momentum profile. TROW also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors AXP. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TROW today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. TROW lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 13 to 6 points over 30 sessions.
Compare American Express Company and T. Rowe Price Group, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare AXP and TROW 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.
- Value38 vs 52TROW +14
- Quality68 vs 80TROW +12
- Momentum58 vs 50AXP +8
- Risk Resilience72 vs 71Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor TROW. TROW’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; AXP keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-23, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-22.
Largest factor move: Momentum -23
New signals
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +11
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
The lead changed hands: TROW moved ahead of AXP in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AXP and TROW both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TROW (T. Rowe Price Group, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
AXP (American Express Company): the counter-case, on momentum, fundamentals, 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
TROWTROW on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
TROWTROW on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
TROWTROW on the peer-relative Value factor, by 14 points.
Momentum
AXPAXP on the Momentum factor, by 8 points.
Lower downside
EvenDownside measures are level or not covered.
Analyst upside
AXPAXP on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors TROW, analyst targets favor AXP. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | AXP | TROW | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +16.5% | +5.3% | AXP has more room |
| Target dispersion | +23.3% | +29.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 6 | 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.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | AXP | TROW |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 12.94% | 7.13% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $1.720 | $3.600 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $3.160 | $5.080 |
| Years increased | 4 | 5 |
| No cut in window | No (1) | Yes |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | #185 |
AXP grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 12.94% a year against TROW's 7.13%. TROW never reduced its regular dividend in the window; AXP did in 1 year.
Yield and payout ratio shown elsewhere on this page are current values, not part of the study window.
Split-adjusted regular dividends per share, 2020–2025, excluding special dividends. Research as of Sep 19, 2026.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TROW. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | TROW | 57 vs 63 |
| Fundamentals | AXPon balance | revenue growth 3.4% vs 2.7%; EPS growth 6.1% vs 29.1%; TTM ROE 34.1% vs 20.4%; gross margin 84.3% vs 70.7%; operating margin 27.2% vs 30.3% — AXP takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | TROW | Value 38 vs 52 |
| Technicals | TROW | Price vs 50-day -1.9% vs -2%; vs 200-day -4.3% vs 0.4% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 72 vs 71 |
| Analyst expectations | AXP | Target upside 16.5% vs 5.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AXP and TROW 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 6 points.
- 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 lead has swung materially session to session. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
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 TROW.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 24 – Oct 23TROW lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 13 to 6 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TROW +6
- 57 vs 63
- 7 sessions ago
- TROW +2
- 56 vs 58
- 30 sessions ago
- TROW +13
- 49 vs 62
- 90 sessions ago
- TROW +11
- 51 vs 62
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Oct 23 when TROW moved ahead of AXP.
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 / 2 bearish, conflicted
Only AXP
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (2.54%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only TROW
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (2.50%)
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
AXP 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 and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -3.68%, AIQ -6 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.72%, AIQ +3 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.
- 1AXP closes the Value gap — currently 14 points behind, the largest single contributor to TROW's edge.
- 2AXP's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3TROW's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 7 points over 30 sessions, and a further 6-point move would eliminate TROW'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
AXP leads on balance| Metric | AXP | TROW |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 3.4% | 2.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 6.1% | 29.1% |
| Gross margin | 84.3% | 70.7% |
| Operating margin | 27.2% | 30.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 34.1% | 20.4% |
| Debt to equity | 1.72 | 0.04 |
Performance
TROW leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | AXP | TROW |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.1% | 3.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 1.4% | -1.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -6.6% | -12.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -0.3% | 5.2% |
| Year to date | -15.3% | 1.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -11.8% | 0% |
Technicals
TROW has the stronger structure| Metric | AXP | TROW |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 60.6 | 50.9 |
| ADX (14) | 22 | 29.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1.9% | -2% |
| Price vs 200-day | -4.3% | 0.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 19.4% | 19.8% |
Risk
Split| Metric | AXP | TROW |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.94 | 0.81 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.48 | 0.01 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.59 | 0.02 |
| Max drawdown | -24.1% | -20.9% |
| Current drawdown | -18.6% | -14.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 25.6% | 23.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.6% | -2.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AXP or TROW?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TROW is the stronger of the two as of Oct 24, 2026, scoring 63 against AXP's 57. The edge comes from value and quality. AXP is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 AXP or TROW the better buy right now?
TROW carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 24, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor TROW over AXP?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. TROW leads Value by 14 points; TROW leads Quality by 12 points; AXP leads Momentum by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AXP or TROW?
Analyst price targets imply +16.5% upside for AXP and +5.3% for TROW, so the Street currently favors AXP. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors TROW. 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, AXP or TROW?
TROW is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. TROW on the peer-relative Value factor, by 14 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, AXP or TROW?
TROW 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, AXP or TROW?
AXP on the Momentum factor, by 8 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, AXP or TROW?
The two are close on downside measures. Downside measures are level or not covered. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is AXP more profitable than TROW?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 84.3% vs 70.7%; operating margin 27.2% vs 30.3%; ttm roe 34.1% vs 20.4%. AXP leads on two measures and TROW 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 TROW's lead over AXP getting stronger or weaker?
TROW lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 13 to 6 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-24 and 2026-10-23. The lead has changed hands 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-23, when TROW moved ahead of AXP.
What would change the AXP vs TROW verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: AXP closes the Value gap — currently 14 points behind, the largest single contributor to TROW's edge; AXP's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; TROW's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 7 points over 30 sessions, and a further 6-point move would eliminate TROW's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about AXP and TROW?
AXP: 1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. TROW: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 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 AXP is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On TROW it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare AXP and TROW 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.