BKH vs CNP Stock Comparison
Compare BKH and CNP across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between BKH and CNP?
BKH leads the current stock comparison as Black Hills Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Black Hills Corporation vs CenterPoint Energy, Inc.
BKH leads
BKH leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 11 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support BKH, its lead is narrowing, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Black Hills Corporation
CenterPoint Energy, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors BKH over CNP, 47 versus 41 as of Sep 11, 2026. BKH's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality. BKH also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BKH today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. BKH lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 11 to 6 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Black Hills Corporation and CenterPoint Energy, 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 BKH and CNP 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.
- Value56 vs 48BKH +8
- Quality40 vs 34BKH +6
- Momentum38 vs 34BKH +4
- Risk Resilience55 vs 52Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor BKH. BKH’s edge is concentrated in value and quality.
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 -9
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -3
No new signals fired.
BKH's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BKH and CNP both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
BKH (Black Hills Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
CNP (CenterPoint Energy, Inc.): the counter-case, on 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
BKHBKH on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CNPCNP on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
BKHBKH on the peer-relative Value factor, by 8 points.
Momentum
BKHBKH on the Momentum factor, by 4 points.
Lower downside
BKHBKH carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
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 | BKH | CNP | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +18.5% | +18.3% | Level |
| Target dispersion | +15.4% | +21.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 2 | 9 | 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 BKH. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | BKH | 47 vs 41 |
| Fundamentals | CNPon balance | revenue growth -42% vs -27.7%; EPS growth -71.3% vs -22.9%; TTM ROE 7.7% vs 9.9%; gross margin 42.9% vs 54.1%; operating margin 23.8% vs 23.2% — CNP takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | BKH | Value 56 vs 48 |
| Technicals | BKH | Price vs 50-day -2.9% vs -6%; vs 200-day -0.6% vs -5.6% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 55 vs 52 |
| Analyst expectations | Even | Target upside 18.5% vs 18.3% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BKH and CNP 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 moderate at 6 points.
- 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)
- 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 BKH.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10BKH lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 11 to 6 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- BKH +6
- 47 vs 41
- 7 sessions ago
- BKH +8
- 49 vs 41
- 30 sessions ago
- BKH +11
- 50 vs 39
- 90 sessions ago
- CNP +3
- 47 vs 50
The lead changed hands 12 times in this window, most recently on Jul 9 when BKH moved ahead of CNP.
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 (1.06%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.32%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- 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.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -1.36%, AIQ -2 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.03%, 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.
- 1CNP closes the Value gap — currently 8 points behind, the largest single contributor to BKH's edge.
- 2CNP's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3BKH's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 5 points over 30 sessions, and a further 6-point move would eliminate BKH'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
CNP leads on balance| Metric | BKH | CNP |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -42% | -27.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -71.3% | -22.9% |
| Gross margin | 42.9% | 54.1% |
| Operating margin | 23.8% | 23.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 7.7% | 9.9% |
| Debt to equity | 1.14 | 2.14 |
Performance
BKH leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | BKH | CNP |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.4% | -1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -1.2% | -3.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 0.5% | -8.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 3.1% | -8.9% |
| Year to date | 4.1% | 2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 23.6% | 4.8% |
Technicals
BKH has the stronger structure| Metric | BKH | CNP |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 45.1 | 40.5 |
| ADX (14) | 8.3 | 9.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | -2.9% | -6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -0.6% | -5.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 17.1% | 18.4% |
Risk
Split| Metric | BKH | CNP |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.07 | -0.13 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.86 | 0.1 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.32 | 0.14 |
| Max drawdown | -11.8% | -13.9% |
| Current drawdown | -5.9% | -13.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 22.9% | 17.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.2% | -1.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BKH or CNP?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, BKH is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 47 against CNP's 41. The edge comes from value and quality. 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 BKH or CNP the better buy right now?
BKH 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: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor BKH over CNP?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. BKH leads Value by 8 points; BKH leads Quality by 6 points; BKH leads Momentum by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BKH or CNP?
Analyst price targets imply +18.5% upside for BKH and +18.3% for CNP. 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, BKH or CNP?
BKH is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. BKH 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, BKH or CNP?
CNP 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, BKH or CNP?
BKH on the Momentum factor, by 4 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, BKH or CNP?
BKH is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. BKH carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is BKH more profitable than CNP?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 42.9% vs 54.1%; operating margin 23.8% vs 23.2%; ttm roe 7.7% vs 9.9%. BKH leads on one measure and CNP 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 BKH's lead over CNP getting stronger or weaker?
BKH lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 11 to 6 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 12 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-09, when BKH moved ahead of CNP.
What would change the BKH vs CNP verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CNP closes the Value gap — currently 8 points behind, the largest single contributor to BKH's edge; CNP's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; BKH's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 5 points over 30 sessions, and a further 6-point move would eliminate BKH's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about BKH and CNP?
BKH: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. CNP: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. The most decision-relevant rule on BKH is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On CNP it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare BKH and CNP 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.