BLK vs CBOE Stock Comparison
BLK currently leads CBOE in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 62 vs 58. The clearest difference is momentum, while CBOE has the stronger quality profile.
What is the main difference between BLK and CBOE?
BLK leads the current stock comparison as BlackRock, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
BlackRock, Inc. vs Cboe Global Markets, Inc.
BLK leads
BLK leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, having only recently taken the lead back from CBOE.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support BLK, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
BlackRock, Inc.
Cboe Global Markets, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors BLK over CBOE, 62 versus 58 as of Oct 31, 2026. BLK's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience, while CBOE holds the stronger quality profile. BLK also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BLK today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. BLK lead: Reversed — CBOE led by 9 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; BLK now leads by 4.
Compare BlackRock, Inc. and Cboe Global Markets, Inc. 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 BLK and CBOE 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.
- Momentum95 vs 80BLK +15
- Risk Resilience63 vs 49BLK +14
- Quality68 vs 75CBOE +7
- Value27 vs 26Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor BLK. BLK’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience; CBOE 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; its 7 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
BLK's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BLK and CBOE both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
BLK (BlackRock, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.
CBOE (Cboe Global Markets, Inc.): the counter-case, on quality, fundamentals, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 38.4% against 22.7%.
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
BLKBLK on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CBOECBOE on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
BLKBLK on the Momentum factor, by 15 points.
Lower downside
BLKBLK on Risk Resilience, by 14 points.
Analyst upside
BLKBLK 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 | BLK | CBOE | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +16.2% | -0.5% | BLK has more room |
| Target dispersion | +26.1% | +57.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 10 | 7 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | BLK | CBOE |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 7.49% | 11.60% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $14.520 | $1.560 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $20.840 | $2.700 |
| Years increased | 5 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #165 | #67 |
CBOE grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 11.60% a year against BLK's 7.49%. 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
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BLK. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | BLK | 62 vs 58 |
| Fundamentals | CBOEon balance | revenue growth 9.4% vs 13.4%; EPS growth -13.1% vs -8.4%; TTM ROE 12.2% vs 25.7%; gross margin 65% vs 52.3%; operating margin 30.8% vs 35.2% — CBOE takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 27 vs 26 |
| Technicals | CBOE | Price vs 50-day 4% vs 14.5%; vs 200-day 8.9% vs 9.8% |
| Risk Resilience | BLK | Risk Resilience 63 vs 49 |
| Analyst expectations | BLK | Target upside 16.2% vs -0.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BLK and CBOE 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)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 BLK.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jul 1 – Oct 30BLK lead: Reversed — CBOE led by 9 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; BLK now leads by 4.
- Today
- BLK +4
- 62 vs 58
- 7 sessions ago
- CBOE +1
- 60 vs 61
- 30 sessions ago
- CBOE +9
- 51 vs 60
- 90 sessions ago
- CBOE +7
- 52 vs 59
The lead changed hands 7 times in this window, most recently on Oct 27 when BLK moved ahead of CBOE.
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.
6 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only BLK
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (2.1%)
4 bullish / 0 bearish
No signal that the other name lacks.
Both carry 4 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish, Uptrend Structure Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
BLK 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -2.44%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +6.77%, AIQ 0 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.
- 1CBOE closes the Momentum gap — currently 15 points behind, the largest single contributor to BLK's edge.
- 2CBOE's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed.
- 3BLK's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 6 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
CBOE leads on balance| Metric | BLK | CBOE |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 9.4% | 13.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -13.1% | -8.4% |
| Gross margin | 65% | 52.3% |
| Operating margin | 30.8% | 35.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 12.2% | 25.7% |
| Debt to equity | 0.26 | 0.28 |
Performance
CBOE leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | BLK | CBOE |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.7% | 0.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 9.4% | 16.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 5.4% | 8.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 11.4% | 4.8% |
| Year to date | 8.2% | 27.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 1.9% | 34.2% |
Technicals
CBOE has the stronger structure| Metric | BLK | CBOE |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 72 | 62.3 |
| ADX (14) | 19.2 | 32 |
| Price vs 50-day | 4% | 14.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | 8.9% | 9.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 22.7% | 38.4% |
Risk
BLK is the more resilient| Metric | BLK | CBOE |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.23 | -0.42 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.1 | 0.9 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.15 | 1.21 |
| Max drawdown | -20.7% | -36.9% |
| Current drawdown | -2.1% | -12.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 27.5% | 35.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.5% | -3.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BLK or CBOE?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, BLK is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 62 against CBOE's 58. The edge comes from momentum and risk resilience. CBOE 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 BLK or CBOE the better buy right now?
BLK carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 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 BLK over CBOE?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. BLK leads Momentum by 15 points; BLK leads Risk Resilience by 14 points; CBOE leads Quality by 7 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BLK or CBOE?
Analyst price targets imply +16.2% upside for BLK and -0.5% for CBOE, so the Street currently favors BLK. 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, BLK or CBOE?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. 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, BLK or CBOE?
CBOE 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, BLK or CBOE?
BLK on the Momentum factor, by 15 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, BLK or CBOE?
BLK is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. BLK 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 BLK more profitable than CBOE?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 65% vs 52.3%; operating margin 30.8% vs 35.2%; ttm roe 12.2% vs 25.7%. BLK leads on one measure and CBOE 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 BLK's lead over CBOE getting stronger or weaker?
BLK lead: Reversed — CBOE led by 9 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; BLK now leads by 4. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-07-01 and 2026-10-30. The lead has changed hands 7 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-27, when BLK moved ahead of CBOE.
What would change the BLK vs CBOE verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CBOE closes the Momentum gap — currently 15 points behind, the largest single contributor to BLK's edge; CBOE's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed; BLK's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 6 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 BLK and CBOE?
BLK: 6 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. CBOE: 4 bullish / 0 bearish. 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 BLK is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On CBOE it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare BLK and CBOE 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.