BAC vs RIOT Stock Comparison
BAC currently leads RIOT in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 47 vs 30. The clearest difference is risk resilience.
What is the main difference between BAC and RIOT?
BAC leads the current stock comparison as Bank of America Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Bank of America Corporation vs Riot Platforms, Inc.
BAC leads
BAC leads by 17 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Value, and the lead has widened from 12 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors RIOT on target upside.
Stable: 5 of 6 evidence groups support BAC, its lead is widening, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Bank of America Corporation
Riot Platforms, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors BAC over RIOT, 47 versus 30 as of Oct 31, 2026. BAC's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and value. BAC also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors RIOT. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BAC today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability. BAC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 12 to 17 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Bank of America Corporation and Riot Platforms, 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 BAC and RIOT 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.
- Risk Resilience60 vs 31BAC +29
- Value57 vs 34BAC +23
- Quality49 vs 28BAC +21
- Momentum26 vs 29Even
5 of 6 evidence groups favor BAC. BAC’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and value.
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 3 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
BAC's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BAC and RIOT both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
BAC (Bank of America Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and value.
RIOT (Riot Platforms, Inc.): the counter-case, on analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 79.5% against 20.8%.
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
BACBAC on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
RIOTRIOT on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
BACBAC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 23 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
BACBAC on Risk Resilience, by 29 points.
Analyst upside
RIOTRIOT on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors BAC, analyst targets favor RIOT. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | BAC | RIOT | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +32.5% | +149.8% | RIOT has more room |
| Target dispersion | +22.6% | +50% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 6 | 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
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BAC. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | BAC | 47 vs 30 |
| Fundamentals | BACon balance | revenue growth -3.3% vs 4.2%; EPS growth -23.8% vs 52.8%; TTM ROE 10.7% vs -48.4%; gross margin 60.4% vs -13.8%; operating margin 22.4% vs -89.1% — BAC takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | BAC | Value 57 vs 34 |
| Technicals | BAC | Price vs 50-day -12.1% vs -32.7%; vs 200-day -7.5% vs -25.7% |
| Risk Resilience | BAC | Risk Resilience 60 vs 31 |
| Analyst expectations | RIOT | Target upside 32.5% vs 149.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BAC and RIOT 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 17 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 been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 BAC.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jul 1 – Oct 30BAC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 12 to 17 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- BAC +17
- 47 vs 30
- 7 sessions ago
- BAC +18
- 47 vs 29
- 30 sessions ago
- BAC +12
- 41 vs 29
- 90 sessions ago
- BAC +13
- 49 vs 36
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Sep 24 when BAC moved ahead of RIOT.
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 / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only BAC
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (3.51%)
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral
Only RIOT
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (2.10%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (8.96%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
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 -2.21%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -6.77%, 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.
- 1RIOT closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 29 points behind, the largest single contributor to BAC's edge.
- 2RIOT's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3BAC'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
BAC leads on balance| Metric | BAC | RIOT |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -3.3% | 4.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -23.8% | 52.8% |
| Gross margin | 60.4% | -13.8% |
| Operating margin | 22.4% | -89.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 10.7% | -48.4% |
| Debt to equity | 1.28 | 0.13 |
Performance
BAC leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | BAC | RIOT |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.1% | 3.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -6.6% | -28.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -17.6% | -34.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -3.8% | -9.6% |
| Year to date | -7.5% | 14% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -3.3% | -32.5% |
Technicals
BAC has the stronger structure| Metric | BAC | RIOT |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 31.2 | 36 |
| ADX (14) | 49.4 | 37.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | -12.1% | -32.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | -7.5% | -25.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 20.8% | 79.5% |
Risk
BAC is the more resilient| Metric | BAC | RIOT |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.73 | 3.88 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.25 | -0.07 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.32 | -0.13 |
| Max drawdown | -22.3% | -56.3% |
| Current drawdown | -21.5% | -49.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 21.8% | 87.5% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.5% | -8.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BAC or RIOT?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, BAC is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 47 against RIOT's 30. The edge comes from risk resilience and value. 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 BAC or RIOT the better buy right now?
BAC 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 BAC over RIOT?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. BAC leads Risk Resilience by 29 points; BAC leads Value by 23 points; BAC leads Quality by 21 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BAC or RIOT?
Analyst price targets imply +32.5% upside for BAC and +149.8% for RIOT, so the Street currently favors RIOT. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors BAC. 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, BAC or RIOT?
BAC is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. BAC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 23 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, BAC or RIOT?
RIOT 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, BAC or RIOT?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, BAC or RIOT?
BAC is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. BAC on Risk Resilience, by 29 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 BAC more profitable than RIOT?
BAC leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 60.4% vs -13.8%; operating margin 22.4% vs -89.1%; ttm roe 10.7% vs -48.4%.
Is BAC's lead over RIOT getting stronger or weaker?
BAC lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 12 to 17 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-07-01 and 2026-10-30. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-24, when BAC moved ahead of RIOT.
What would change the BAC vs RIOT verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: RIOT closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 29 points behind, the largest single contributor to BAC's edge; RIOT's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; BAC'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 BAC and RIOT?
BAC: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. RIOT: 0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral. The most decision-relevant rule on BAC is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On RIOT it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare BAC and RIOT 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.