BKD vs UHS Stock Comparison
Compare BKD and UHS across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between BKD and UHS?
UHS leads the current stock comparison as Universal Health Services, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Brookdale Senior Living Inc. vs Universal Health Services, Inc.
UHS leads
UHS leads by 13 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience, but the lead has narrowed from 24 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors BKD on target upside.
Competitive: 5 of 6 evidence groups support UHS, and its lead is narrowing.
Brookdale Senior Living Inc.
Universal Health Services, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors UHS over BKD, 65 versus 52 as of Sep 11, 2026. UHS's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience. UHS also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors BKD. 5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor UHS today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. UHS lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 24 to 13 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Brookdale Senior Living Inc. and Universal Health Services, 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 BKD and UHS 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.
- Quality41 vs 70UHS +29
- Risk Resilience51 vs 60UHS +9
- Value65 vs 73UHS +8
- Momentum52 vs 53Even
5 of 6 evidence groups favor UHS. UHS’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Momentum +10
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -5
No new signals fired.
UHS's lead narrowed by 3 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BKD and UHS both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
UHS (Universal Health Services, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
BKD (Brookdale Senior Living Inc.): the counter-case, on analyst expectations.
The AIQ Score and Wall Street therefore point in different directions on this pair.
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
UHSUHS on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
UHSUHS on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
UHSUHS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 8 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
UHSUHS on Risk Resilience, by 9 points.
Analyst upside
BKDBKD on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors UHS, analyst targets favor BKD. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | BKD | UHS | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +56.5% | +15.4% | BKD has more room |
| Target dispersion | +26.3% | +71.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 9 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
The two are measuring different things. The AIQ Score reads current fundamentals, valuation, trend and risk; analyst targets price forward expectations. A divergence of this kind is either a contrarian opportunity or a sign the model is missing something already priced in — it is worth resolving before acting on either.
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
5 of 6 covered evidence groups favor UHS. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | UHS | 52 vs 65 |
| Fundamentals | UHS | revenue growth -6% vs 3.2%; EPS growth 4.5% vs 5.3%; TTM ROE 4.1% vs 20.7%; gross margin 14.4% vs 90.7%; operating margin 3.8% vs 11.4% |
| Valuation | UHS | Value 65 vs 73 |
| Technicals | UHS | Price vs 50-day -11% vs 6%; vs 200-day -8.6% vs -6.7% |
| Risk Resilience | UHS | Risk Resilience 51 vs 60 |
| Analyst expectations | BKD | Target upside 56.5% vs 15.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BKD and UHS 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 13 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 5 of 6 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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)
- 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 UHS.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10UHS lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 24 to 13 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- UHS +13
- 52 vs 65
- 7 sessions ago
- UHS +18
- 46 vs 64
- 30 sessions ago
- UHS +24
- 44 vs 68
- 90 sessions ago
- UHS +14
- 58 vs 72
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.
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (2.18%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.86%)
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
0 bullish / 2 bearish
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (12.35%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, 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.
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.49%, AIQ +2 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.22%, 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.
- 1BKD closes the Quality gap — currently 29 points behind, the largest single contributor to UHS's edge.
- 2BKD's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3UHS starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 11 points over 30 sessions, and a further 13-point move would eliminate UHS'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
UHS leads on balance| Metric | BKD | UHS |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -6% | 3.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 4.5% | 5.3% |
| Gross margin | 14.4% | 90.7% |
| Operating margin | 3.8% | 11.4% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 4.1% | 20.7% |
| Debt to equity | -44.49 | 0.7 |
Performance
UHS leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | BKD | UHS |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.3% | 3.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -6% | 0.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -6.9% | 19.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -15.8% | -7.3% |
| Year to date | 13.1% | -20.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 57.6% | -7% |
Technicals
UHS has the stronger structure| Metric | BKD | UHS |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 61.4 | 49.8 |
| ADX (14) | 23.9 | 15.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | -11% | 6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -8.6% | -6.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 27.4% | 23.2% |
Risk
UHS is the more resilient| Metric | BKD | UHS |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.39 | 0.24 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.28 | -0.2 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.99 | -0.25 |
| Max drawdown | -30.1% | -42.2% |
| Current drawdown | -27.3% | -29.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 40.1% | 32.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.5% | -2.9% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BKD or UHS?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, UHS is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 65 against BKD's 52. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. 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 BKD or UHS the better buy right now?
UHS carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 5 of 6 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 UHS over BKD?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. UHS leads Quality by 29 points; UHS leads Risk Resilience by 9 points; UHS leads Value by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BKD or UHS?
Analyst price targets imply +56.5% upside for BKD and +15.4% for UHS, so the Street currently favors BKD. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors UHS. The two are measuring different things: the model reads current fundamentals, valuation, trend and risk; the Street is pricing forward expectations. A divergence of this kind is either a contrarian opportunity or a sign the model is missing something the analysts have already priced — it is the single most useful row on this page to investigate. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, BKD or UHS?
UHS is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. UHS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 8 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, BKD or UHS?
UHS 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, BKD or UHS?
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, BKD or UHS?
UHS is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. UHS 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 BKD more profitable than UHS?
UHS leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 14.4% vs 90.7%; operating margin 3.8% vs 11.4%; ttm roe 4.1% vs 20.7%.
Is UHS's lead over BKD getting stronger or weaker?
UHS lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 24 to 13 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 BKD vs UHS verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: BKD closes the Quality gap — currently 29 points behind, the largest single contributor to UHS's edge; BKD's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; UHS starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 11 points over 30 sessions, and a further 13-point move would eliminate UHS's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about BKD and UHS?
BKD: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. UHS: 0 bullish / 2 bearish. The most decision-relevant rule on BKD is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On UHS it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare BKD and UHS 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.