BABA vs BIDU Stock Comparison
Alibaba Group Holding Limited vs Baidu, Inc.
BIDU leads
BIDU leads by 8 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from BABA. Wall Street currently favors BABA on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support BIDU, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Alibaba Group Holding Limited
Baidu, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors BIDU over BABA, 45 versus 37 as of Sep 5, 2026. BIDU's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum, while BABA holds the stronger quality profile. BIDU also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors BABA. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BIDU today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. BIDU lead: Reversed — BABA led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; BIDU now leads by 8.
Compare Alibaba Group Holding Limited and Baidu, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare BABA and BIDU 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.
- Value30%32 vs 57BIDU +25
- Momentum25%21 vs 31BIDU +10
- Quality30%50 vs 42BABA +8
- Risk Resilience15%47 vs 53BIDU +6
3 of 6 evidence groups favor BIDU. BIDU’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum; BABA keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-03, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-02.
Largest factor move: Momentum -2
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +4
No new signals fired.
BIDU's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BABA and BIDU both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
BIDU (Baidu, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and momentum.
BABA (Alibaba Group Holding Limited): the counter-case, on quality, fundamentals, technicals.
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
BIDUBIDU on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
BIDUBIDU on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
BIDUBIDU on the peer-relative Value factor, by 25 points.
Momentum
BIDUBIDU on the Momentum factor, by 10 points.
Lower downside
BIDUBIDU on Risk Resilience, by 6 points.
Analyst upside
BABABABA on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors BIDU, analyst targets favor BABA. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | BABA | BIDU | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +62.1% | +20.2% | BABA has more room |
| Target dispersion | +26.7% | +65.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 6 | 4 | 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 BIDU. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | BIDU | 37 vs 45 |
| Fundamentals | BABAon balance | revenue growth 10.2% vs -2.6%; EPS growth -59.1% vs -32.5%; TTM ROE 7% vs -1.7%; gross margin 38.1% vs 40.8%; operating margin 4.2% vs -6% — BABA takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | BIDU | Value 32 vs 57 |
| Technicals | BABA | Price vs 50-day -2.2% vs -5.8%; vs 200-day -17.6% vs -22.2% |
| Risk Resilience | BIDU | Risk Resilience 47 vs 53 |
| Analyst expectations | BABA | Target upside 62.1% vs 20.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BABA and BIDU 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 8 points.
- 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 leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. (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 BIDU.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 22 – Sep 3BIDU lead: Reversed — BABA led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; BIDU now leads by 8.
- Today
- BIDU +8
- 37 vs 45
- 7 sessions ago
- BIDU +1
- 41 vs 42
- 30 sessions ago
- BABA +4
- 50 vs 46
- 90 sessions ago
- BIDU +6
- 38 vs 44
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Aug 27 when BIDU moved ahead of BABA.
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 (17.16%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (16.22%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
BIDU 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 +1.28%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +4.07%, 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.
- 1BABA closes the Value gap — currently 25 points behind, the largest single contributor to BIDU's edge.
- 2BABA's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3BIDU's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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
BABA leads on balance| Metric | BABA | BIDU |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 10.2% | -2.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -59.1% | -32.5% |
| Gross margin | 38.1% | 40.8% |
| Operating margin | 4.2% | -6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 7% | -1.7% |
| Debt to equity | 0.25 | 0.42 |
Performance
BABA leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | BABA | BIDU |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -3.9% | -1.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -11.8% | -12.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -11.2% | -29.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -14.2% | -19% |
| Year to date | -23.7% | -26.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -19.1% | -0.7% |
Technicals
BABA has the stronger structure| Metric | BABA | BIDU |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 32 | 35.6 |
| ADX (14) | 20.3 | 23.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | -2.2% | -5.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | -17.6% | -22.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 43.8% | 51.4% |
Risk
BIDU is the more resilient| Metric | BABA | BIDU |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.24 | 1.74 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.33 | 0.16 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.59 | 0.26 |
| Max drawdown | -49.9% | -44.1% |
| Current drawdown | -41% | -41.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 44% | 51.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.6% | -4.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BABA or BIDU?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, BIDU is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 45 against BABA's 37. The edge comes from value and momentum. BABA 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 BABA or BIDU the better buy right now?
BIDU carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 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 BIDU over BABA?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. BIDU leads Value by 25 points; BIDU leads Momentum by 10 points; BABA leads Quality by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BABA or BIDU?
Analyst price targets imply +62.1% upside for BABA and +20.2% for BIDU, so the Street currently favors BABA. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors BIDU. 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, BABA or BIDU?
BIDU is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. BIDU on the peer-relative Value factor, by 25 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, BABA or BIDU?
BIDU 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, BABA or BIDU?
BIDU on the Momentum factor, by 10 points. Momentum carries 25% of 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, BABA or BIDU?
BIDU is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. BIDU on Risk Resilience, by 6 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is BABA more profitable than BIDU?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 38.1% vs 40.8%; operating margin 4.2% vs -6%; ttm roe 7% vs -1.7%. BABA leads on two measures and BIDU 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 BIDU's lead over BABA getting stronger or weaker?
BIDU lead: Reversed — BABA led by 4 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; BIDU now leads by 8. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-22 and 2026-09-03. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-27, when BIDU moved ahead of BABA.
What would change the BABA vs BIDU verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: BABA closes the Value gap — currently 25 points behind, the largest single contributor to BIDU's edge; BABA's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; BIDU's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about BABA and BIDU?
BABA: 0 bullish / 4 bearish. BIDU: 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 BABA is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On BIDU it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare BABA and BIDU with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.