AYI vs CMI Stock Comparison
AYI currently leads CMI in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 70 vs 56. The clearest difference is momentum.
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 momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Acuity Brands, Inc. vs Cummins Inc.
AYI leads
AYI leads by 14 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Quality, and the lead has widened from 3 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors CMI on target upside.
Stable: 5 of 6 evidence groups support AYI, its lead is widening, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Acuity Brands, Inc.
Cummins Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors AYI over CMI, 70 versus 56 as of Oct 31, 2026. AYI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and quality. AYI also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors CMI. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor AYI today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the lead has swung materially session to session. AYI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 14 points over 30 sessions. AYI leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so a sweep is not explained by valuation alone — it deserves additional scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, expectations or event risk.
Compare Acuity Brands, Inc. and Cummins 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 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.
- Momentum86 vs 53AYI +33
- Quality65 vs 54AYI +11
- Value65 vs 59AYI +6
- Risk Resilience66 vs 62AYI +4
5 of 6 evidence groups favor AYI. AYI’s edge is concentrated in momentum and quality.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum -3
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
AYI's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
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 momentum and quality.
CMI (Cummins Inc.): the counter-case, on 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
AYIAYI on the Momentum factor, by 33 points.
Lower downside
AYIAYI on Risk Resilience, by 4 points.
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 | +23.4% | +59% | CMI has more room |
| Target dispersion | +29.8% | +25.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 4 | 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.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | AYI | CMI |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 5.51% | 7.66% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $0.520 | $5.283 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $0.680 | $7.640 |
| Years increased | 2 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #228 | #154 |
CMI grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 7.66% a year against AYI's 5.51%. Neither company reduced its regular dividend in any year of the window.
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
5 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 | 70 vs 56 |
| 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 0.7% vs -7.5%; vs 200-day 2.4% vs -12% |
| Risk Resilience | AYI | Risk Resilience 66 vs 62 |
| Analyst expectations | CMI | Target upside 23.4% vs 59% |
✓ 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 rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 14 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 AYI.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28AYI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 14 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- AYI +14
- 70 vs 56
- 7 sessions ago
- AYI +16
- 70 vs 54
- 30 sessions ago
- AYI +3
- 59 vs 56
- 90 sessions ago
- AYI +14
- 59 vs 45
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Oct 19 when AYI moved ahead of CMI.
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.
3 bullish / 0 bearish
Only AYI
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (2.05%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
Only CMI
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (11.66%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
CMI 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 -2.82%, AIQ -1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -3.46%, 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 Momentum gap — currently 33 points behind, the largest single contributor to AYI's edge.
- 2CMI's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3AYI's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 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
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) | 0.1% | -2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 2.3% | 2.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -6.1% | -16% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 10.9% | -16.8% |
| Year to date | -11.9% | 4.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -13.9% | 26.1% |
Technicals
AYI has the stronger structure| Metric | AYI | CMI |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 68.3 | 56.2 |
| ADX (14) | 24.3 | 37.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | 0.7% | -7.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | 2.4% | -12% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 24.5% | 27.7% |
Risk
AYI is the more resilient| Metric | AYI | CMI |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.41 | 1.64 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.27 | 0.76 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.37 | 1.11 |
| Max drawdown | -31.6% | -29% |
| Current drawdown | -15.8% | -27% |
| Annualized volatility | 37.9% | 36.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.2% | -3.3% |
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 Oct 31, 2026, scoring 70 against CMI's 56. The edge comes from momentum and quality. 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 Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 5 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Stable rating means the gap is wide and the evidence is broad, so the conclusion is unlikely to turn on a single session.
Why does the AIQ Score favor AYI over CMI?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. AYI leads Momentum by 33 points; AYI leads Quality by 11 points; AYI leads Value by 6 points. AYI leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so the sweep is not explained by CMI simply being cheaper — it warrants extra scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, forward expectations or event risk the factors do not capture.
Which has more analyst upside, AYI or CMI?
Analyst price targets imply +23.4% upside for AYI and +59% 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?
AYI on the Momentum factor, by 33 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?
AYI is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. AYI on Risk Resilience, by 4 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 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: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 14 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-10-19, when AYI moved ahead of CMI.
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 Momentum gap — currently 33 points behind, the largest single contributor to AYI's edge; CMI's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; AYI's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; 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 AYI and CMI?
AYI: 3 bullish / 0 bearish. CMI: 1 bullish / 2 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 Death Cross Active (bearish, 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.