AZO vs WSM Stock Comparison
Compare AZO and WSM across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between AZO and WSM?
WSM leads the current stock comparison as Williams-Sonoma, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
AutoZone, Inc. vs Williams-Sonoma, Inc.
WSM leads
WSM leads by 11 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 4 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors AZO on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support WSM, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
AutoZone, Inc.
Williams-Sonoma, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors WSM over AZO, 49 versus 38 as of Sep 11, 2026. WSM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while AZO holds the stronger value profile. WSM also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors AZO. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor WSM today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. WSM lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 11 points over 30 sessions.
Compare AutoZone, Inc. and Williams-Sonoma, 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 AZO and WSM 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.
- Quality53 vs 81WSM +28
- Momentum17 vs 30WSM +13
- Risk Resilience44 vs 55WSM +11
- Value37 vs 30AZO +7
4 of 6 evidence groups favor WSM. WSM’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; AZO keeps a meaningful value 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 +4
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +3
No new signals fired.
WSM's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — AZO and WSM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
WSM (Williams-Sonoma, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
AZO (AutoZone, Inc.): the counter-case, on value, valuation, 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
WSMWSM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
WSMWSM on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
AZOAZO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 7 points.
Momentum
WSMWSM on the Momentum factor, by 13 points.
Lower downside
WSMWSM on Risk Resilience, by 11 points.
Analyst upside
AZOAZO on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors WSM, analyst targets favor AZO. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | AZO | WSM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +29% | +3.1% | AZO has more room |
| Target dispersion | +22.2% | +38.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 10 | 13 | 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 WSM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | WSM | 38 vs 49 |
| Fundamentals | WSMon balance | revenue growth 13.3% vs 8.5%; EPS growth 37.7% vs 47.2%; TTM ROE -80.4% vs 57.8%; gross margin 51.8% vs 47.2%; operating margin 18% vs 19.2% — WSM takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | AZO | Value 37 vs 30 |
| Technicals | WSM | Price vs 50-day -4.8% vs -2.5%; vs 200-day -14.4% vs 9.1% |
| Risk Resilience | WSM | Risk Resilience 44 vs 55 |
| Analyst expectations | AZO | Target upside 29% vs 3.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of AZO and WSM and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is moderate at 11 points.
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 WSM.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10WSM lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 11 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- WSM +11
- 38 vs 49
- 7 sessions ago
- WSM +6
- 42 vs 48
- 30 sessions ago
- WSM +4
- 53 vs 57
- 90 sessions ago
- WSM +6
- 47 vs 53
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on May 6 when WSM moved ahead of AZO.
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.
0 bullish / 4 bearish
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (11.45%)
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (0.0%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (13.15%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
WSM 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 down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.16%, AIQ +1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +1.11%, 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.
- 1AZO closes the Quality gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to WSM's edge.
- 2AZO's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3WSM'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
WSM leads on balance| Metric | AZO | WSM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 13.3% | 8.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 37.7% | 47.2% |
| Gross margin | 51.8% | 47.2% |
| Operating margin | 18% | 19.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -80.4% | 57.8% |
| Debt to equity | -4.54 | 0.71 |
Performance
WSM leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | AZO | WSM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.8% | 0.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -5.4% | -8.7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -7.3% | 8.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -22.4% | 20.4% |
| Year to date | -13.5% | 25.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -31.5% | 11.3% |
Technicals
WSM has the stronger structure| Metric | AZO | WSM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 40.7 | 33.2 |
| ADX (14) | 11.1 | 18.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -4.8% | -2.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | -14.4% | 9.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 21.5% | 21.4% |
Risk
WSM is the more resilient| Metric | AZO | WSM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.13 | 1.23 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.35 | 0.35 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.77 | 0.65 |
| Max drawdown | -33.8% | -23.6% |
| Current drawdown | -33.8% | -11.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 29.2% | 33.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3% | -3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, AZO or WSM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, WSM is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 49 against AZO's 38. The edge comes from quality and momentum. AZO is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 WSM the better buy right now?
WSM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor WSM over AZO?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. WSM leads Quality by 28 points; WSM leads Momentum by 13 points; WSM leads Risk Resilience by 11 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, AZO or WSM?
Analyst price targets imply +29% upside for AZO and +3.1% for WSM, so the Street currently favors AZO. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors WSM. 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 WSM?
AZO is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. AZO on the peer-relative Value factor, by 7 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 WSM?
WSM 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 WSM?
WSM on the Momentum factor, by 13 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 WSM?
WSM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. WSM on Risk Resilience, by 11 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 AZO more profitable than WSM?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 51.8% vs 47.2%; operating margin 18% vs 19.2%; ttm roe -80.4% vs 57.8%. AZO leads on one measure and WSM on two measures, 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 WSM's lead over AZO getting stronger or weaker?
WSM lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 11 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 once in that window, most recently on 2026-05-06, when WSM moved ahead of AZO.
What would change the AZO vs WSM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: AZO closes the Quality gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to WSM's edge; AZO's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; WSM'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 WSM?
AZO: 0 bullish / 4 bearish. WSM: 1 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 AZO is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On WSM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare AZO and WSM 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.