BLK vs CBOE Stock Comparison
Compare BLK and CBOE across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between BLK and CBOE?
CBOE leads the current stock comparison as Cboe Global Markets, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
BlackRock, Inc. vs Cboe Global Markets, Inc.
CBOE leads
CBOE leads by 10 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Quality, having only recently taken the lead back from BLK. Wall Street currently favors BLK on target upside.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support CBOE, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
BlackRock, Inc.
Cboe Global Markets, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CBOE over BLK, 50 versus 40 as of Sep 11, 2026. CBOE's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and quality, while BLK holds the stronger risk resilience profile. CBOE also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors BLK. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CBOE today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. CBOE lead: Reversed — BLK led by 8 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; CBOE now leads by 10.
Compare BlackRock, Inc. and Cboe Global Markets, 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 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.
- Momentum15 vs 50CBOE +35
- Risk Resilience63 vs 49BLK +14
- Quality63 vs 75CBOE +12
- Value27 vs 26Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor CBOE. CBOE’s edge is concentrated in momentum and quality; BLK keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -11
No new signals fired.
CBOE's lead narrowed by 3 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
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
CBOE (Cboe Global Markets, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and quality.
BLK (BlackRock, Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, 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
CBOECBOE 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
CBOECBOE on the Momentum factor, by 35 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
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors CBOE, analyst targets favor BLK. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | BLK | CBOE | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +21.1% | +16.4% | BLK has more room |
| Target dispersion | +26.6% | +41.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 7 | 5 | 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
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CBOE. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | CBOE | 40 vs 50 |
| Fundamentals | CBOEon balance | revenue growth 5.8% vs 13.4%; EPS growth -13.3% vs -8.4%; TTM ROE 11.7% vs 25.7%; gross margin 55.7% vs 52.3%; operating margin 31.1% vs 35.2% — CBOE takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 27 vs 26 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day -1.8% vs -2.2%; vs 200-day 0.2% vs 0.6% |
| Risk Resilience | BLK | Risk Resilience 63 vs 49 |
| Analyst expectations | BLK | Target upside 21.1% vs 16.4% |
✓ 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 moderate at 10 points.
- Only 2 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 CBOE.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10CBOE lead: Reversed — BLK led by 8 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; CBOE now leads by 10.
- Today
- CBOE +10
- 40 vs 50
- 7 sessions ago
- CBOE +6
- 47 vs 53
- 30 sessions ago
- BLK +8
- 57 vs 49
- 90 sessions ago
- BLK +1
- 46 vs 45
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Aug 21 when CBOE moved ahead of BLK.
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.
3 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (3.67%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.55%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
CBOE 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 +1.62%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -2.24%, AIQ -3 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.
- 1BLK closes the Momentum gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to CBOE's edge.
- 2BLK's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3CBOE's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 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) | 5.8% | 13.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -13.3% | -8.4% |
| Gross margin | 55.7% | 52.3% |
| Operating margin | 31.1% | 35.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 11.7% | 25.7% |
| Debt to equity | 0.26 | 0.28 |
Performance
CBOE leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | BLK | CBOE |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -4% | -2.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -8.5% | -1.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 5.1% | -4.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 11.7% | 1.2% |
| Year to date | -0.7% | 14.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -3.8% | 22.7% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | BLK | CBOE |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 29.5 | 45.3 |
| ADX (14) | 26.2 | 15.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1.8% | -2.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 0.2% | 0.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 22.2% | 35.7% |
Risk
BLK is the more resilient| Metric | BLK | CBOE |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.19 | -0.33 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.15 | 0.69 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.22 | 0.88 |
| Max drawdown | -23.3% | -36.9% |
| Current drawdown | -11.7% | -21.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 27.5% | 33.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.6% | -3.1% |
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, CBOE is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 50 against BLK's 40. The edge comes from momentum and quality. BLK 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 BLK or CBOE the better buy right now?
CBOE carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor CBOE over BLK?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CBOE leads Momentum by 35 points; BLK leads Risk Resilience by 14 points; CBOE leads Quality by 12 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 +21.1% upside for BLK and +16.4% for CBOE, so the Street currently favors BLK. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors CBOE. 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, 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?
CBOE on the Momentum factor, by 35 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 55.7% vs 52.3%; operating margin 31.1% vs 35.2%; ttm roe 11.7% 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 CBOE's lead over BLK getting stronger or weaker?
CBOE lead: Reversed — BLK led by 8 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; CBOE now leads by 10. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-21, when CBOE moved ahead of BLK.
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: BLK closes the Momentum gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to CBOE's edge; BLK's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; CBOE's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 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: 3 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. CBOE: 3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. 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.