BE vs STEM Stock Comparison
STEM currently leads BE in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 52 vs 37. The clearest difference is value, while BE has the stronger risk resilience profile.
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 15 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support STEM, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Bloom Energy Corporation
Stem, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors STEM over BE, 52 versus 37 as of Oct 31, 2026. STEM's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while BE holds the stronger risk resilience 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: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. STEM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 15 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 from daily closes; distributions are not included.
Price return comparison
Growth of $10,000, price only
Split-adjusted closes only. Distributions are excluded, which understates the return of any fund or stock that pays them.
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.
- Value24 vs 65STEM +41
- Quality63 vs 76STEM +13
- Risk Resilience32 vs 20BE +12
- Momentum24 vs 25Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor STEM. STEM’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; BE keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum +16
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 7 active signals are unchanged.
STEM's lead narrowed by 4 AIQ points in the latest session.
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 risk resilience, technicals.
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
STEMSTEM on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
STEMSTEM on the peer-relative Value factor, by 41 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
BEBE on Risk Resilience, by 12 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 | +36% | +241.4% | STEM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +63.3% | +85.8% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 16 | 6 | 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 | 37 vs 52 |
| Fundamentals | Even | revenue growth 16% vs 16%; EPS growth 25% vs 28.8%; TTM ROE 39.6% vs 28.6%; gross margin 32.3% vs 38.2%; operating margin 14.8% vs -30.1% |
| Valuation | STEM | Value 24 vs 65 |
| Technicals | BE | Price vs 50-day -18% vs -50.6%; vs 200-day 3.4% vs -66.9% |
| Risk Resilience | BE | Risk Resilience 32 vs 20 |
| Analyst expectations | STEM | Target upside 36% vs 241.4% |
✓ 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 wide at 15 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (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 STEM.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28STEM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 15 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- STEM +15
- 37 vs 52
- 7 sessions ago
- STEM +25
- 27 vs 52
- 30 sessions ago
- STEM +14
- 41 vs 55
- 90 sessions ago
- STEM +20
- 36 vs 56
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.
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only BE
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (12.38%)
- Beta Spike Warning — bearish, risk, long horizon
1 bullish / 4 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only STEM
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (89.89%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode, MACD Bearish Crossover.
STEM 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 4 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -8.61%, AIQ +4 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -7.11%, 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.
- 1BE closes the Value gap — currently 41 points behind, the largest single contributor to STEM's edge.
- 2BE's Beta Spike Warning resolves — a bearish risk rule currently active against it.
- 3STEM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 4 bearish rules at once.
- 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
Split| Metric | BE | STEM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 16% | 16% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 25% | 28.8% |
| Gross margin | 32.3% | 38.2% |
| Operating margin | 14.8% | -30.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 39.6% | 28.6% |
| Debt to equity | 1.44 | -1.36 |
Performance
BE leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | BE | STEM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -4.4% | -22.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -17.7% | -39.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 10.1% | -51.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -13.6% | -73.4% |
| Year to date | 162.5% | -80% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 106.6% | -88.8% |
Technicals
BE has the stronger structure| Metric | BE | STEM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 37.1 | 9.8 |
| ADX (14) | 24.9 | 35.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -18% | -50.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 3.4% | -66.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 88.8% | 86.3% |
Risk
BE is the more resilient| Metric | BE | STEM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 4.46 | 3.89 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.14 | -2.04 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.95 | -3.01 |
| Max drawdown | -52.6% | -89.1% |
| Current drawdown | -34% | -89.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 111.9% | 90.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -10.5% | -9% |
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 Oct 31, 2026, scoring 52 against BE's 37. The edge comes from value and quality. BE is not without a case — it holds the better risk resilience 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 Oct 31, 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 STEM over BE?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. STEM leads Value by 41 points; STEM leads Quality by 13 points; BE leads Risk Resilience by 12 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 +36% upside for BE and +241.4% 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?
STEM 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?
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, 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 12 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 32.3% vs 38.2%; operating margin 14.8% vs -30.1%; ttm roe 39.6% vs 28.6%. BE leads on two measures and STEM 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 STEM's lead over BE getting stronger or weaker?
STEM lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 15 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
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 Beta Spike Warning resolves — a bearish risk rule currently active against it; STEM's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 4 bearish rules at once; 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 BE and STEM?
BE: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. STEM: 1 bullish / 4 bearish / 2 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 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.