AZO vs BURL Stock Comparison
AZO currently leads BURL in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 55 vs 40. The clearest difference is momentum, while BURL has the stronger quality profile.
What is the main difference between AZO and BURL?
AZO leads the current stock comparison as AutoZone, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
AutoZone, Inc. vs Burlington Stores, Inc.
AZO leads
AZO leads by 15 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from BURL. Wall Street currently favors BURL on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support AZO, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
AutoZone, Inc.
Burlington Stores, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors AZO over BURL, 55 versus 40 as of Oct 31, 2026. AZO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum, while BURL holds the stronger quality profile. AZO also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors BURL. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor AZO today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. AZO lead: Reversed — BURL led by 5 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; AZO now leads by 15.
Compare AutoZone, Inc. and Burlington Stores, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price return from daily closes; distributions are not included.
Price return comparison
Growth of $10,000, price only
Split-adjusted closes only. Distributions are excluded, which understates the return of any fund or stock that pays them.
Compare AZO and BURL 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.
- Momentum88 vs 15AZO +73
- Quality53 vs 60BURL +7
- Value37 vs 42BURL +5
- Risk Resilience40 vs 40Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor AZO. AZO’s edge is concentrated in momentum; BURL keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-30, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-29.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 2 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 7 active signals are unchanged.
AZO's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AZO and BURL both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
AZO (AutoZone, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum.
BURL (Burlington Stores, Inc.): the counter-case, on quality, value, valuation.
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
AZOAZO on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
BURLBURL on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
BURLBURL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 5 points.
Momentum
AZOAZO on the Momentum factor, by 73 points.
Lower downside
EvenDownside measures are level or not covered.
Analyst upside
BURLBURL on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors AZO, analyst targets favor BURL. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | AZO | BURL | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +14.7% | +60.4% | BURL has more room |
| Target dispersion | +33.8% | +35.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 16 | 11 | 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 AZO. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | AZO | 55 vs 40 |
| Fundamentals | AZOon balance | revenue growth 13.3% vs 5.1%; EPS growth 37.7% vs 60.9%; TTM ROE -80.4% vs 39.8%; gross margin 51.8% vs 44.6%; operating margin 18% vs 8.1% — AZO takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | BURL | Value 37 vs 42 |
| Technicals | AZO | Price vs 50-day 7.1% vs -10.7%; vs 200-day -3.3% vs -24.1% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 40 vs 40 |
| Analyst expectations | BURL | Target upside 14.7% vs 60.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AZO and BURL 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 wide at 15 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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)
- 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 AZO.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jul 1 – Oct 30AZO lead: Reversed — BURL led by 5 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; AZO now leads by 15.
- Today
- AZO +15
- 55 vs 40
- 7 sessions ago
- AZO +14
- 55 vs 41
- 30 sessions ago
- BURL +5
- 50 vs 55
- 90 sessions ago
- AZO +3
- 38 vs 35
The lead changed hands 7 times in this window, most recently on Oct 15 when AZO moved ahead of BURL.
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 / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only AZO
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 5 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only BURL
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.00%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (2.2%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: Death Cross Active.
AZO 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 +1.04%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -2.17%, AIQ 0 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.
- 1BURL closes the Momentum gap — currently 73 points behind, the largest single contributor to AZO's edge.
- 2BURL's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3AZO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 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
AZO leads on balance| Metric | AZO | BURL |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 13.3% | 5.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 37.7% | 60.9% |
| Gross margin | 51.8% | 44.6% |
| Operating margin | 18% | 8.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -80.4% | 39.8% |
| Debt to equity | -4.54 | 2.95 |
Performance
AZO leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | AZO | BURL |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0% | -5.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 11.5% | -12.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 5% | -33.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -10.4% | -26.1% |
| Year to date | -6.9% | -18.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -17.4% | -13% |
Technicals
AZO has the stronger structure| Metric | AZO | BURL |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 69 | 15.1 |
| ADX (14) | 25.7 | 22.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | 7.1% | -10.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | -3.3% | -24.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 30.8% | 30.4% |
Risk
Split| Metric | AZO | BURL |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.15 | 0.76 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.59 | -0.29 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.8 | -0.41 |
| Max drawdown | -29.6% | -38.9% |
| Current drawdown | -20.4% | -37.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 30.3% | 40.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3% | -4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AZO or BURL?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, AZO is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 55 against BURL's 40. The edge comes from momentum. BURL 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 AZO or BURL the better buy right now?
AZO carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 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 AZO over BURL?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. AZO leads Momentum by 73 points; BURL leads Quality by 7 points; BURL leads Value by 5 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AZO or BURL?
Analyst price targets imply +14.7% upside for AZO and +60.4% for BURL, so the Street currently favors BURL. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors AZO. 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, AZO or BURL?
BURL is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. BURL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 5 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, AZO or BURL?
BURL 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, AZO or BURL?
AZO on the Momentum factor, by 73 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, AZO or BURL?
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 AZO more profitable than BURL?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 51.8% vs 44.6%; operating margin 18% vs 8.1%; ttm roe -80.4% vs 39.8%. AZO leads on two measures and BURL 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 AZO's lead over BURL getting stronger or weaker?
AZO lead: Reversed — BURL led by 5 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; AZO now leads by 15. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-07-01 and 2026-10-30. The lead has changed hands 7 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-15, when AZO moved ahead of BURL.
What would change the AZO vs BURL verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: BURL closes the Momentum gap — currently 73 points behind, the largest single contributor to AZO's edge; BURL's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; AZO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; 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 AZO and BURL?
AZO: 1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. BURL: 1 bullish / 5 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 AZO is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On BURL it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare AZO and BURL 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.