AYI vs CMI Stock Comparison
Compare AYI and CMI across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between AYI and CMI?
AYI leads the current stock comparison as Acuity Brands, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Acuity Brands, Inc. vs Cummins Inc.
AYI leads
AYI leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Value, but the lead has narrowed from 14 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors CMI on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support AYI, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Acuity Brands, Inc.
Cummins Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors AYI over CMI, 53 versus 49 as of Sep 11, 2026. AYI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and value, while CMI holds the stronger momentum profile. AYI also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors CMI. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor AYI today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. AYI lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 4 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Acuity Brands, Inc. and Cummins 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 AYI and CMI 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.
- Quality65 vs 54AYI +11
- Momentum16 vs 23CMI +7
- Value65 vs 59AYI +6
- Risk Resilience66 vs 63Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor AYI. AYI’s edge is concentrated in quality and value; CMI keeps a meaningful momentum 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 -7
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +3
No new signals fired.
AYI's lead narrowed by 3 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AYI and CMI both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
AYI (Acuity Brands, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and value.
CMI (Cummins Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, 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
AYIAYI on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
AYIAYI on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
AYIAYI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 6 points.
Momentum
CMICMI on the Momentum factor, by 7 points.
Lower downside
EvenDownside measures are level or not covered.
Analyst upside
CMICMI on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors AYI, analyst targets favor CMI. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | AYI | CMI | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +26.8% | +43.3% | CMI has more room |
| Target dispersion | +26.5% | +25.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 10 | 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 AYI. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | AYI | 53 vs 49 |
| Fundamentals | AYIon balance | revenue growth 13.5% vs 12.6%; EPS growth 47.5% vs 42.7%; TTM ROE 16.9% vs 21.9%; gross margin 49.3% vs 25.3%; operating margin 14.5% vs 11.1% — AYI takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | AYI | Value 65 vs 59 |
| Technicals | AYI | Price vs 50-day -6.2% vs -10.8%; vs 200-day -0.8% vs -8.5% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 66 vs 63 |
| Analyst expectations | CMI | Target upside 26.8% vs 43.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AYI and CMI 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 4 points. (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)
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 AYI.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10AYI lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 4 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- AYI +4
- 53 vs 49
- 7 sessions ago
- AYI +9
- 55 vs 46
- 30 sessions ago
- AYI +14
- 64 vs 50
- 90 sessions ago
- AYI +18
- 66 vs 48
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Jun 23 when CMI moved ahead of AYI.
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 / 2 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.60%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (3.81%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
AYI 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 is up while the AIQ Score moved down 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.86%, AIQ -2 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +1.22%, 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.
- 1CMI closes the Quality gap — currently 11 points behind, the largest single contributor to AYI's edge.
- 2CMI's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3AYI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 10 points over 30 sessions, and a further 4-point move would eliminate AYI'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
AYI leads on balance| Metric | AYI | CMI |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 13.5% | 12.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 47.5% | 42.7% |
| Gross margin | 49.3% | 25.3% |
| Operating margin | 14.5% | 11.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 16.9% | 21.9% |
| Debt to equity | 0.28 | 0.64 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | AYI | CMI |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -4.3% | -0.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -12.2% | -13.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 12.8% | -12.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 18.9% | -1.1% |
| Year to date | -12.2% | 7.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -5.7% | 38.4% |
Technicals
AYI has the stronger structure| Metric | AYI | CMI |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 28.4 | 25.5 |
| ADX (14) | 19.4 | 50.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | -6.2% | -10.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | -0.8% | -8.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 23.8% | 23.6% |
Risk
Split| Metric | AYI | CMI |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.45 | 1.58 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.01 | 0.98 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.02 | 1.44 |
| Max drawdown | -31.6% | -25% |
| Current drawdown | -16.1% | -24.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 38.3% | 36.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3% | -3.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AYI or CMI?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, AYI is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 53 against CMI's 49. The edge comes from quality and value. CMI 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 AYI or CMI the better buy right now?
AYI 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 AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor AYI over CMI?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. AYI leads Quality by 11 points; CMI leads Momentum by 7 points; AYI leads Value by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AYI or CMI?
Analyst price targets imply +26.8% upside for AYI and +43.3% for CMI, so the Street currently favors CMI. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors AYI. 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, AYI or CMI?
AYI is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. AYI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 6 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, AYI or CMI?
AYI 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, AYI or CMI?
CMI on the Momentum factor, by 7 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, AYI or CMI?
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 AYI more profitable than CMI?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 49.3% vs 25.3%; operating margin 14.5% vs 11.1%; ttm roe 16.9% vs 21.9%. AYI leads on two measures and CMI 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 AYI's lead over CMI getting stronger or weaker?
AYI lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 4 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 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-06-23, when CMI moved ahead of AYI.
What would change the AYI vs CMI verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CMI closes the Quality gap — currently 11 points behind, the largest single contributor to AYI's edge; CMI's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; AYI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 10 points over 30 sessions, and a further 4-point move would eliminate AYI's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about AYI and CMI?
AYI: 2 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. CMI: 2 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 AYI is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On CMI it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare AYI and CMI 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.