BLDR vs JHX Stock Comparison
JHX currently leads BLDR in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 48 vs 44. The clearest difference is momentum, while BLDR has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between BLDR and JHX?
JHX leads the current stock comparison as James Hardie Industries plc, with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Builders FirstSource, Inc. vs James Hardie Industries plc
JHX leads
JHX leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, having only recently taken the lead back from BLDR. Wall Street currently favors BLDR on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support JHX, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Builders FirstSource, Inc.
James Hardie Industries plc
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors JHX over BLDR, 48 versus 44 as of Oct 22, 2026. JHX's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience, while BLDR holds the stronger value profile. JHX also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors BLDR. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor JHX today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. JHX lead: Reversed — BLDR led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; JHX now leads by 4.
Compare Builders FirstSource, Inc. and James Hardie Industries plc 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 BLDR and JHX 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.
- Value71 vs 44BLDR +27
- Momentum35 vs 58JHX +23
- Risk Resilience44 vs 58JHX +14
- Quality26 vs 38JHX +12
4 of 6 evidence groups favor JHX. JHX’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience; BLDR keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +5
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +5
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
JHX's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BLDR and JHX both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
JHX (James Hardie Industries plc): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.
BLDR (Builders FirstSource, Inc.): the counter-case, on value, valuation, 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
JHXJHX on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
JHXJHX on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
BLDRBLDR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 27 points.
Momentum
JHXJHX on the Momentum factor, by 23 points.
Lower downside
JHXJHX on Risk Resilience, by 14 points.
Analyst upside
BLDRBLDR on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors JHX, analyst targets favor BLDR. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | BLDR | JHX | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +58.5% | +22.8% | BLDR has more room |
| Target dispersion | +77.8% | +58.8% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 14 | 6 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor JHX. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | JHX | 44 vs 48 |
| Fundamentals | JHXon balance | revenue growth 17.5% vs 5%; EPS growth 90.7% vs 266.6%; TTM ROE 2.5% vs 2.3%; gross margin 29.2% vs 35.9%; operating margin 3% vs 13.3% — JHX takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | BLDR | Value 71 vs 44 |
| Technicals | JHX | Price vs 50-day -12.9% vs -4.9%; vs 200-day -34.7% vs 9.4% |
| Risk Resilience | JHX | Risk Resilience 44 vs 58 |
| Analyst expectations | BLDR | Target upside 58.5% vs 22.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BLDR and JHX 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 narrow at 4 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (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 JHX.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20JHX lead: Reversed — BLDR led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; JHX now leads by 4.
- Today
- JHX +4
- 44 vs 48
- 7 sessions ago
- JHX +3
- 42 vs 45
- 30 sessions ago
- BLDR +3
- 43 vs 40
- 90 sessions ago
- JHX +7
- 44 vs 51
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Sep 15 when BLDR moved ahead of JHX.
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 / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only BLDR
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (34.34%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.38%)
- Beta Spike Warning — bearish, risk, long horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
Only JHX
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (14.44%)
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
BLDR is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
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 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.76%, AIQ +1 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.57%, 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.
- 1BLDR closes the Momentum gap — currently 23 points behind, the largest single contributor to JHX's edge.
- 2BLDR's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3JHX'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
JHX leads on balance| Metric | BLDR | JHX |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 17.5% | 5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 90.7% | 266.6% |
| Gross margin | 29.2% | 35.9% |
| Operating margin | 3% | 13.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 2.5% | 2.3% |
| Debt to equity | 1.31 | 0.69 |
Performance
JHX leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | BLDR | JHX |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 4.3% | 7.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -11.4% | -3.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -24.1% | 6.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -39.9% | 19.8% |
| Year to date | -47.6% | 27.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -56.1% | 21.9% |
Technicals
JHX has the stronger structure| Metric | BLDR | JHX |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 40.1 | 60.4 |
| ADX (14) | 28.4 | 25.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | -12.9% | -4.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | -34.7% | 9.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 37.6% | 33.7% |
Risk
JHX is the more resilient| Metric | BLDR | JHX |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.63 | 1.72 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.48 | 0.58 |
| Sortino ratio | -2.85 | 1.04 |
| Max drawdown | -60.8% | -32.4% |
| Current drawdown | -58.2% | -14.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 49.9% | 44.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.9% | -4.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BLDR or JHX?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, JHX is the stronger of the two as of Oct 22, 2026, scoring 48 against BLDR's 44. The edge comes from momentum and risk resilience. BLDR is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 BLDR or JHX the better buy right now?
JHX carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 22, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor JHX over BLDR?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. BLDR leads Value by 27 points; JHX leads Momentum by 23 points; JHX leads Risk Resilience by 14 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BLDR or JHX?
Analyst price targets imply +58.5% upside for BLDR and +22.8% for JHX, so the Street currently favors BLDR. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors JHX. 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, BLDR or JHX?
BLDR is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. BLDR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 27 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, BLDR or JHX?
JHX 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, BLDR or JHX?
JHX on the Momentum factor, by 23 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, BLDR or JHX?
JHX is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. JHX on Risk Resilience, by 14 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 BLDR more profitable than JHX?
JHX leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 29.2% vs 35.9%; operating margin 3% vs 13.3%; ttm roe 2.5% vs 2.3%.
Is JHX's lead over BLDR getting stronger or weaker?
JHX lead: Reversed — BLDR led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; JHX now leads by 4. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-15, when BLDR moved ahead of JHX.
What would change the BLDR vs JHX verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: BLDR closes the Momentum gap — currently 23 points behind, the largest single contributor to JHX's edge; BLDR's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; JHX'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 BLDR and JHX?
BLDR: 1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. JHX: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. 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 BLDR is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On JHX it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare BLDR and JHX 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.