BAX vs COO Stock Comparison
Compare BAX and COO across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between BAX and COO?
COO leads the current stock comparison as The Cooper Companies, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Baxter International Inc. vs The Cooper Companies, Inc.
COO leads
COO leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 15 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support COO, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Baxter International Inc.
The Cooper Companies, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors COO over BAX, 46 versus 43 as of Sep 11, 2026. COO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while BAX holds the stronger momentum profile. COO also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor COO today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. COO lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 3 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Baxter International Inc. and The Cooper Companies, 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 BAX and COO 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.
- Quality20 vs 57COO +37
- Momentum31 vs 19BAX +12
- Risk Resilience54 vs 43BAX +11
- Value69 vs 59BAX +10
2 of 6 evidence groups favor COO. COO’s edge is concentrated in quality; BAX keeps a meaningful momentum 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: Risk Resilience +1
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience -16
New signals
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.66%)
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (0.0%)
COO's lead narrowed by 4 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BAX and COO both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
COO (The Cooper Companies, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
BAX (Baxter International Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, risk resilience, value.
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
COOCOO on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
BAXBAX on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
BAXBAX on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 points.
Momentum
BAXBAX on the Momentum factor, by 12 points.
Lower downside
BAXBAX on Risk Resilience, by 11 points.
Analyst upside
COOCOO on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | BAX | COO | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +4.3% | +42.5% | COO has more room |
| Target dispersion | +28.2% | +32.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 5 | 5 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor COO. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 43 vs 46 |
| Fundamentals | COOon balance | revenue growth 9.6% vs 5.6%; EPS growth 9% vs -160.6%; TTM ROE -16.6% vs 2.8%; gross margin 30.1% vs 64.4%; operating margin -2.4% vs 11.8% — COO takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | BAX | Value 69 vs 59 |
| Technicals | BAX | Price vs 50-day -4.3% vs -25.2%; vs 200-day 18.3% vs -20% |
| Risk Resilience | BAX | Risk Resilience 54 vs 43 |
| Analyst expectations | COO | Target upside 4.3% vs 42.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BAX and COO 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 narrow at 3 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. (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 COO.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10COO lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 3 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- COO +3
- 43 vs 46
- 7 sessions ago
- Level
- 50 vs 50
- 30 sessions ago
- COO +15
- 48 vs 63
- 90 sessions ago
- COO +8
- 52 vs 60
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
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.
3 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (21.67%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
2 bullish / 5 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (1.61%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
COO 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 -1.57%, AIQ +1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -0.48%, AIQ -3 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.
- 1BAX closes the Quality gap — currently 37 points behind, the largest single contributor to COO's edge.
- 2BAX's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3COO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 5 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 12 points over 30 sessions, and a further 3-point move would eliminate COO'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
COO leads on balance| Metric | BAX | COO |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 9.6% | 5.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 9% | -160.6% |
| Gross margin | 30.1% | 64.4% |
| Operating margin | -2.4% | 11.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -16.6% | 2.8% |
| Debt to equity | 1.56 | 0.3 |
Performance
BAX leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | BAX | COO |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -5.9% | -10.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -10.3% | -17.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 19.1% | -20% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 34% | -22.9% |
| Year to date | 26.5% | -27.4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 0.4% | -15.3% |
Technicals
BAX has the stronger structure| Metric | BAX | COO |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 24.1 | 9.4 |
| ADX (14) | 24.2 | 33 |
| Price vs 50-day | -4.3% | -25.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 18.3% | -20% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 24.4% | 56.3% |
Risk
BAX is the more resilient| Metric | BAX | COO |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.18 | 0.58 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.11 | -0.68 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.14 | -0.89 |
| Max drawdown | -35.5% | -35.8% |
| Current drawdown | -14.7% | -35.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 43.5% | 32.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.6% | -2.9% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BAX or COO?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, COO is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 46 against BAX's 43. The edge comes from quality. BAX is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 BAX or COO the better buy right now?
COO carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor COO over BAX?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. COO leads Quality by 37 points; BAX leads Momentum by 12 points; BAX leads Risk Resilience by 11 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BAX or COO?
Analyst price targets imply +4.3% upside for BAX and +42.5% for COO, so the Street currently favors COO. The model and the Street agree here, which is a broader base of evidence than either alone. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, BAX or COO?
BAX is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. BAX on the peer-relative Value factor, by 10 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, BAX or COO?
BAX 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, BAX or COO?
BAX on the Momentum factor, by 12 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, BAX or COO?
BAX is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. BAX 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 BAX more profitable than COO?
COO leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 30.1% vs 64.4%; operating margin -2.4% vs 11.8%; ttm roe -16.6% vs 2.8%.
Is COO's lead over BAX getting stronger or weaker?
COO lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 3 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the BAX vs COO verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: BAX closes the Quality gap — currently 37 points behind, the largest single contributor to COO's edge; BAX's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; COO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 5 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 12 points over 30 sessions, and a further 3-point move would eliminate COO's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about BAX and COO?
BAX: 3 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. COO: 2 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 BAX is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On COO it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare BAX and COO 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.