BAC vs TOL Stock Comparison
TOL currently leads BAC in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 54 vs 46. The clearest difference is momentum.
What is the main difference between BAC and TOL?
TOL leads the current stock comparison as Toll Brothers, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Bank of America Corporation vs Toll Brothers, Inc.
TOL leads
TOL leads by 8 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, but the lead has narrowed from 15 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors BAC on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support TOL, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Bank of America Corporation
Toll Brothers, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors TOL over BAC, 54 versus 46 as of Oct 22, 2026. TOL's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience. TOL also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors BAC. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TOL today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. TOL lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 8 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Bank of America Corporation and Toll Brothers, 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 TOL 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.
- Momentum24 vs 44TOL +20
- Risk Resilience58 vs 68TOL +10
- Value57 vs 60Even
- Quality49 vs 50Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor TOL. TOL’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +11
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
TOL's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BAC and TOL both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
TOL (Toll Brothers, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.
BAC (Bank of America Corporation): 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
TOLTOL on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
TOLTOL on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
TOLTOL on the Momentum factor, by 20 points.
Lower downside
TOLTOL on Risk Resilience, by 10 points.
Analyst upside
BACBAC on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors TOL, analyst targets favor BAC. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | BAC | TOL | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +30.5% | +28.2% | BAC has more room |
| Target dispersion | +22.6% | +42.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 8 | 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 | BAC | TOL |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 8.45% | 17.37% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $0.720 | $0.440 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $1.080 | $0.980 |
| Years increased | 5 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #133 | #22 |
TOL grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 17.37% a year against BAC's 8.45%. 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor TOL. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | TOL | 46 vs 54 |
| Fundamentals | TOLon balance | revenue growth -3.3% vs 5%; EPS growth -23.8% vs 8.8%; TTM ROE 10.7% vs 14.2%; gross margin 60.4% vs 24.2%; operating margin 22.4% vs 13.8% — TOL takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 57 vs 60 |
| Technicals | TOL | Price vs 50-day -13.2% vs -2.8%; vs 200-day -8.1% vs -6% |
| Risk Resilience | TOL | Risk Resilience 58 vs 68 |
| Analyst expectations | BAC | Target upside 30.5% vs 28.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BAC and TOL 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.
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (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 TOL.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20TOL lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 8 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- TOL +8
- 46 vs 54
- 7 sessions ago
- TOL +11
- 41 vs 52
- 30 sessions ago
- TOL +15
- 40 vs 55
- 90 sessions ago
- BAC +1
- 54 vs 53
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Sep 14 when TOL moved ahead of BAC.
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 / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only BAC
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.14%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
Only TOL
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (3.71%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
TOL 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 +0.28%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.33%, AIQ +2 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.
- 1BAC closes the Momentum gap — currently 20 points behind, the largest single contributor to TOL's edge.
- 2BAC's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3TOL's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 7 points over 30 sessions, and a further 8-point move would eliminate TOL's advantage entirely.
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
TOL leads on balance| Metric | BAC | TOL |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -3.3% | 5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -23.8% | 8.8% |
| Gross margin | 60.4% | 24.2% |
| Operating margin | 22.4% | 13.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 10.7% | 14.2% |
| Debt to equity | 1.28 | 0.32 |
Performance
TOL leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | BAC | TOL |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -6.2% | 2.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -9.9% | -1.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -16.5% | -9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -5.3% | -8.6% |
| Year to date | -7.9% | 0.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 0.4% | 0.9% |
Technicals
TOL has the stronger structure| Metric | BAC | TOL |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 25.5 | 51.4 |
| ADX (14) | 48.6 | 10.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | -13.2% | -2.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | -8.1% | -6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 21.8% | 25.3% |
Risk
TOL is the more resilient| Metric | BAC | TOL |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.75 | 1.3 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.13 | 0.05 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.16 | 0.1 |
| Max drawdown | -22.3% | -25.3% |
| Current drawdown | -21.9% | -18.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 21.9% | 34.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.5% | -3.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BAC or TOL?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, TOL is the stronger of the two as of Oct 22, 2026, scoring 54 against BAC's 46. The edge comes from momentum and risk resilience. 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 TOL the better buy right now?
TOL carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 22, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor TOL over BAC?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. TOL leads Momentum by 20 points; TOL leads Risk Resilience by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BAC or TOL?
Analyst price targets imply +30.5% upside for BAC and +28.2% for TOL, so the Street currently favors BAC. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors TOL. 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 TOL?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. 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 TOL?
TOL 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 TOL?
TOL on the Momentum factor, by 20 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, BAC or TOL?
TOL is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. TOL on Risk Resilience, by 10 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 TOL?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 60.4% vs 24.2%; operating margin 22.4% vs 13.8%; ttm roe 10.7% vs 14.2%. BAC leads on two measures and TOL 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 TOL's lead over BAC getting stronger or weaker?
TOL lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 8 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-14, when TOL moved ahead of BAC.
What would change the BAC vs TOL verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: BAC closes the Momentum gap — currently 20 points behind, the largest single contributor to TOL's edge; BAC's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; TOL's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 7 points over 30 sessions, and a further 8-point move would eliminate TOL's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about BAC and TOL?
BAC: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. TOL: 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 BAC is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On TOL it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare BAC and TOL 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.