BGCP vs CCC Stock Comparison
CCC currently leads BGCP in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 59 vs 45. The clearest difference is value, while BGCP has the stronger quality profile.
What is the main difference between BGCP and CCC?
CCC leads the current stock comparison as CCC Intelligent Solutions Holdings Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
BGC Partners, Inc. vs CCC Intelligent Solutions Holdings Inc.
CCC leads
CCC leads by 14 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Risk Resilience.
Competitive: 3 of 4 evidence groups support CCC, and its current signal state is conflicted.
BGC Partners, Inc.
CCC Intelligent Solutions Holdings Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CCC over BGCP, 59 versus 45 as of Nov 1, 2026. CCC's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and risk resilience, while BGCP holds the stronger quality profile. 3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor CCC today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. CCC lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 14 points over 30 sessions.
Compare BGC Partners, Inc. and CCC Intelligent Solutions Holdings Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare BGCP and CCC 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.
- Value38 vs 66CCC +28
- Risk Resilience41 vs 50CCC +9
- Quality55 vs 51BGCP +4
3 of 4 evidence groups favor CCC. CCC’s edge is concentrated in value and risk resilience; BGCP keeps a meaningful quality edge.
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.
Largest factor move: Momentum -12
New signals
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
CCC's lead narrowed by 3 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BGCP and CCC both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CCC (CCC Intelligent Solutions Holdings Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and risk resilience.
BGCP (BGC Partners, Inc.): the counter-case, on quality.
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
CCCCCC on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CCCCCC on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CCCCCC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 28 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
CCCCCC on Risk Resilience, by 9 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | BGCP | CCC | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | — | 0% | Level |
| Target dispersion | — | +13.1% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 3 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor CCC. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | CCC | 45 vs 59 |
| Fundamentals | Even | revenue growth -11.5% vs 1.7%; TTM ROE 19.2% vs 2.3%; gross margin 80% vs 73.5%; operating margin 11.9% vs 15.9% |
| Valuation | CCC | Value 38 vs 66 |
| Technicals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Risk Resilience | CCC | Risk Resilience 41 vs 50 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BGCP and CCC and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 14 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 CCC.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jul 1 – Oct 30CCC lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 14 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- CCC +14
- 45 vs 59
- 7 sessions ago
- CCC +17
- 45 vs 62
- 30 sessions ago
- CCC +14
- 46 vs 60
- 90 sessions ago
- CCC +14
- 46 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.
No active signals
No signal that the other name lacks.
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only CCC
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (17.52%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
CCC 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 and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -0.39%, 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.
- 1BGCP closes the Value gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to CCC's edge.
- 2BGCP generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3CCC's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 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 | BGCP | CCC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -11.5% | 1.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 0% | 14.5% |
| Gross margin | 80% | 73.5% |
| Operating margin | 11.9% | 15.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 19.2% | 2.3% |
| Debt to equity | 1.6 | 0.77 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | BGCP | CCC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | — | -0.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | — | 16.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | — | 21.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | — | 44.6% |
| Year to date | — | -3.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | — | -12.3% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | BGCP | CCC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | — | 55 |
| ADX (14) | — | 34.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | — | 7.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | — | 26% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | — | 39.7% |
Risk
CCC is the more resilient| Metric | BGCP | CCC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | — | 0.86 |
| Sharpe ratio | — | -0.02 |
| Sortino ratio | — | -0.04 |
| Max drawdown | — | -51.6% |
| Current drawdown | — | -12.3% |
| Annualized volatility | — | 56.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | — | -5.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BGCP or CCC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CCC is the stronger of the two as of Nov 1, 2026, scoring 59 against BGCP's 45. The edge comes from value and risk resilience. BGCP is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 BGCP or CCC the better buy right now?
CCC carries the stronger systematic profile as of Nov 1, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 3 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor CCC over BGCP?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CCC leads Value by 28 points; CCC leads Risk Resilience by 9 points; BGCP leads Quality by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BGCP or CCC?
Analyst price targets imply not covered upside for BGCP and 0% for CCC. 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, BGCP or CCC?
CCC is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CCC on the peer-relative Value factor, by 28 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, BGCP or CCC?
CCC 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, BGCP or CCC?
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, BGCP or CCC?
CCC is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CCC on Risk Resilience, by 9 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 BGCP more profitable than CCC?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 80% vs 73.5%; operating margin 11.9% vs 15.9%; ttm roe 19.2% vs 2.3%. BGCP leads on two measures and CCC 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 CCC's lead over BGCP getting stronger or weaker?
CCC lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 14 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-07-01 and 2026-10-30. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the BGCP vs CCC verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: BGCP closes the Value gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to CCC's edge; BGCP generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover; CCC's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 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 BGCP and CCC?
BGCP: No active signals. CCC: 3 bullish / 1 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. On CCC it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare BGCP and CCC 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.