BK vs USB Stock Comparison
USB currently leads BK in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 57 vs 46. The clearest difference is value, while BK has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between BK and USB?
USB leads the current stock comparison as U.S. Bancorp, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation vs U.S. Bancorp
USB leads
USB leads by 11 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, and the lead has widened from 0 points over 30 sessions.
Stable: 4 of 6 evidence groups support USB, its lead is widening, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation
U.S. Bancorp
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors USB over BK, 57 versus 46 as of Oct 21, 2026. USB's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while BK holds the stronger risk resilience profile. USB also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor USB today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability. USB lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 0 to 11 points over 30 sessions.
Compare The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation and U.S. Bancorp 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 BK and USB 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 56USB +18
- Quality42 vs 55USB +13
- Risk Resilience72 vs 64BK +8
4 of 6 evidence groups favor USB. USB’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; BK keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session.
Largest factor move: Momentum +8
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
USB's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BK and USB both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
USB (U.S. Bancorp): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
BK (The Bank of New York Mellon 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
USBUSB on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
USBUSB on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
USBUSB on the peer-relative Value factor, by 18 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
BKBK on Risk Resilience, by 8 points.
Analyst upside
USBUSB 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 | BK | USB | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -38.7% | +17.4% | USB has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +17.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 15 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | BK | USB |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 10.03% | 3.96% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $1.240 | $1.680 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $2.000 | $2.040 |
| Years increased | 5 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #101 | #286 |
BK grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 10.03% a year against USB's 3.96%. 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 USB. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | USB | 46 vs 57 |
| Fundamentals | USB | revenue growth -91.6% vs 3%; TTM ROE 11.4% vs 12.6%; gross margin 52.5% vs 64.7%; operating margin 19.8% vs 24.4% |
| Valuation | USB | Value 38 vs 56 |
| Technicals | BK | Price vs 50-day 11.4% vs -2.6%; vs 200-day 18.5% vs 2.1% |
| Risk Resilience | BK | Risk Resilience 72 vs 64 |
| Analyst expectations | USB | Target upside -38.7% vs 17.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BK and USB and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is moderate at 11 points.
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
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 USB.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20USB lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 0 to 11 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- USB +11
- 46 vs 57
- 7 sessions ago
- Level
- 50 vs 50
- 30 sessions ago
- Level
- 50 vs 50
- 90 sessions ago
- USB +8
- 52 vs 60
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Sep 2 when USB moved ahead of BK.
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.
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only USB
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (4.75%)
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
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 -0.07%, 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.
- 1BK closes the Value gap — currently 18 points behind, the largest single contributor to USB's edge.
- 2BK generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3USB's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 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
USB leads on balance| Metric | BK | USB |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -91.6% | 3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -100% | -0.7% |
| Gross margin | 52.5% | 64.7% |
| Operating margin | 19.8% | 24.4% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 11.4% | 12.6% |
| Debt to equity | 1.52 | 1.1 |
Performance
BK leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | BK | USB |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.6% | 3.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 0.9% | -0.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 16.1% | -8.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 28.5% | 4% |
| Year to date | 18.1% | 10.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 52.3% | 29.4% |
Technicals
BK has the stronger structure| Metric | BK | USB |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 58.5 | 57.4 |
| ADX (14) | 30.4 | 32.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | 11.4% | -2.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 18.5% | 2.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 16.4% | 21% |
Risk
BK is the more resilient| Metric | BK | USB |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.87 | 0.65 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.69 | 1.09 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.38 | 1.58 |
| Max drawdown | -10.2% | -16.2% |
| Current drawdown | -0.6% | -9.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 21.3% | 22.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.1% | -2.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BK or USB?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, USB is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 57 against BK's 46. The edge comes from value and quality. BK 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 BK or USB the better buy right now?
USB carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Stable rating means the gap is wide and the evidence is broad, so the conclusion is unlikely to turn on a single session.
Why does the AIQ Score favor USB over BK?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. USB leads Value by 18 points; USB leads Quality by 13 points; BK leads Risk Resilience by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BK or USB?
Analyst price targets imply -38.7% upside for BK and +17.4% for USB, so the Street currently favors USB. 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, BK or USB?
USB is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. USB on the peer-relative Value factor, by 18 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, BK or USB?
USB 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, BK or USB?
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, BK or USB?
BK is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. BK on Risk Resilience, by 8 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 BK more profitable than USB?
USB leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 52.5% vs 64.7%; operating margin 19.8% vs 24.4%; ttm roe 11.4% vs 12.6%.
Is USB's lead over BK getting stronger or weaker?
USB lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 0 to 11 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 once in that window, most recently on 2026-09-02, when USB moved ahead of BK.
What would change the BK vs USB verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: BK closes the Value gap — currently 18 points behind, the largest single contributor to USB's edge; BK generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover; USB's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; 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 BK and USB?
BK: No active signals. USB: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. On USB it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare BK and USB 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.