BE vs STEM Stock Comparison
Compare BE and STEM across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between BE and STEM?
STEM leads the current stock comparison as Stem, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Bloom Energy Corporation vs Stem, Inc.
STEM leads
STEM leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 10 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support STEM, and its lead is narrowing.
Bloom Energy Corporation
Stem, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors STEM over BE, 53 versus 48 as of Sep 11, 2026. STEM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while BE holds the stronger momentum profile. STEM also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor STEM today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. STEM lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 5 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Bloom Energy Corporation and Stem, 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 BE and STEM 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.
- Momentum95 vs 31BE +64
- Value24 vs 65STEM +41
- Quality43 vs 76STEM +33
- Risk Resilience30 vs 20BE +10
3 of 6 evidence groups favor STEM. STEM’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; BE 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.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -2
New signals
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (2.0%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
STEM's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BE and STEM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
STEM (Stem, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
BE (Bloom Energy Corporation): the counter-case, on momentum, risk resilience, fundamentals.
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
STEMSTEM on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
BEBE on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
STEMSTEM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 41 points.
Momentum
BEBE on the Momentum factor, by 64 points.
Lower downside
BEBE on Risk Resilience, by 10 points.
Analyst upside
STEMSTEM 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 | BE | STEM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -7.9% | +82% | STEM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +99.6% | +49.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 15 | 5 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor STEM. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | STEM | 48 vs 53 |
| Fundamentals | BEon balance | revenue growth 41.8% vs 16%; EPS growth 172% vs 28.8%; TTM ROE 24.8% vs 28.6%; gross margin 31.2% vs 38.2%; operating margin 11.2% vs -30.1% — BE takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | STEM | Value 24 vs 65 |
| Technicals | BE | Price vs 50-day 22% vs -21.3%; vs 200-day 33.4% vs -52.4% |
| Risk Resilience | BE | Risk Resilience 30 vs 20 |
| Analyst expectations | STEM | Target upside -7.9% vs 82% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BE and STEM 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 5 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (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 STEM.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10STEM lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 5 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- STEM +5
- 48 vs 53
- 7 sessions ago
- STEM +7
- 46 vs 53
- 30 sessions ago
- STEM +10
- 38 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- STEM +11
- 34 vs 45
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Jun 26 when STEM moved ahead of BE.
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.
4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (16.64%)
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
0 bullish / 4 bearish / 2 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (79.58%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (2.0%)
BE is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
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 +6.68%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -7.81%, 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.
- 1BE closes the Value gap — currently 41 points behind, the largest single contributor to STEM's edge.
- 2BE's RSI Overbought resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3STEM starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 5 points over 30 sessions, and a further 5-point move would eliminate STEM'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
BE leads on balance| Metric | BE | STEM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 41.8% | 16% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 172% | 28.8% |
| Gross margin | 31.2% | 38.2% |
| Operating margin | 11.2% | -30.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 24.8% | 28.6% |
| Debt to equity | 1.74 | -1.36 |
Performance
BE leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | BE | STEM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 19% | -6.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 9% | -6.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 10.4% | -30.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 62.4% | -51.9% |
| Year to date | 197.5% | -64.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 383.7% | -62.1% |
Technicals
BE has the stronger structure| Metric | BE | STEM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 73.5 | 36.9 |
| ADX (14) | 16.4 | 17.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | 22% | -21.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | 33.4% | -52.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 75.1% | 71.8% |
Risk
BE is the more resilient| Metric | BE | STEM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 4.34 | 4.04 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.88 | -0.58 |
| Sortino ratio | 3.25 | -0.87 |
| Max drawdown | -52.6% | -83.4% |
| Current drawdown | -25.3% | -82.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 115.4% | 97.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -10.4% | -9.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BE or STEM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, STEM is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 53 against BE's 48. The edge comes from value and quality. BE 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 BE or STEM the better buy right now?
STEM carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor STEM over BE?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. BE leads Momentum by 64 points; STEM leads Value by 41 points; STEM leads Quality by 33 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BE or STEM?
Analyst price targets imply -7.9% upside for BE and +82% for STEM, so the Street currently favors STEM. 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, BE or STEM?
STEM is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. STEM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 41 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, BE or STEM?
BE 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, BE or STEM?
BE on the Momentum factor, by 64 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, BE or STEM?
BE is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. BE 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 BE more profitable than STEM?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 31.2% vs 38.2%; operating margin 11.2% vs -30.1%; ttm roe 24.8% vs 28.6%. BE leads on one measure and STEM 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 STEM's lead over BE getting stronger or weaker?
STEM lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 5 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 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-06-26, when STEM moved ahead of BE.
What would change the BE vs STEM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: BE closes the Value gap — currently 41 points behind, the largest single contributor to STEM's edge; BE's RSI Overbought resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; STEM starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 5 points over 30 sessions, and a further 5-point move would eliminate STEM's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about BE and STEM?
BE: 4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. STEM: 0 bullish / 4 bearish / 2 neutral. 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 BE is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On STEM it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare BE and STEM 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.