BLMN vs BROS Stock Comparison
Compare BLMN and BROS across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between BLMN and BROS?
BLMN leads the current stock comparison as Bloomin' Brands, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Bloomin' Brands, Inc. vs Dutch Bros Inc.
BLMN leads
BLMN leads by 14 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum, but the lead has narrowed from 25 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors BROS on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support BLMN, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Bloomin' Brands, Inc.
Dutch Bros Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors BLMN over BROS, 41 versus 27 as of Sep 11, 2026. BLMN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum, while BROS holds the stronger quality profile. BLMN also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors BROS. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BLMN today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. BLMN lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 25 to 14 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Bloomin' Brands, Inc. and Dutch Bros 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 BLMN and BROS 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.
- Value72 vs 24BLMN +48
- Quality25 vs 32BROS +7
- Momentum33 vs 26BLMN +7
- Risk Resilience26 vs 27Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor BLMN. BLMN’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum; BROS keeps a meaningful quality edge.
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 -1
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
BLMN's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BLMN and BROS both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
BLMN (Bloomin' Brands, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and momentum.
BROS (Dutch Bros Inc.): the counter-case, on quality, fundamentals, 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
BLMNBLMN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
BROSBROS on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
BLMNBLMN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 48 points.
Momentum
BLMNBLMN on the Momentum factor, by 7 points.
Lower downside
BROSBROS carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
BROSBROS on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors BLMN, analyst targets favor BROS. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | BLMN | BROS | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +20.8% | +76.4% | BROS has more room |
| Target dispersion | +33.3% | +37.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 7 | 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
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BLMN. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | BLMN | 41 vs 27 |
| Fundamentals | BROSon balance | revenue growth -4.1% vs 18.6%; EPS growth -43.1% vs 115.4%; TTM ROE 7.4% vs 13%; gross margin 40.1% vs 25%; operating margin 1.3% vs 9.7% — BROS takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | BLMN | Value 72 vs 24 |
| Technicals | BLMN | Price vs 50-day -8.9% vs -24%; vs 200-day 15.5% vs -21.2% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 26 vs 27 |
| Analyst expectations | BROS | Target upside 20.8% vs 76.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BLMN and BROS 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 wide at 14 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 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 BLMN.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10BLMN lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 25 to 14 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- BLMN +14
- 41 vs 27
- 7 sessions ago
- BLMN +17
- 46 vs 29
- 30 sessions ago
- BLMN +25
- 51 vs 26
- 90 sessions ago
- BLMN +14
- 49 vs 35
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 / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (27.03%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
2 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (1.12%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
BLMN 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 +0.23%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.06%, 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.
- 1BROS closes the Value gap — currently 48 points behind, the largest single contributor to BLMN's edge.
- 2BROS's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3BLMN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 11 points over 30 sessions, and a further 14-point move would eliminate BLMN'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
BROS leads on balance| Metric | BLMN | BROS |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -4.1% | 18.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -43.1% | 115.4% |
| Gross margin | 40.1% | 25% |
| Operating margin | 1.3% | 9.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 7.4% | 13% |
| Debt to equity | 4.43 | 1.51 |
Performance
BLMN leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | BLMN | BROS |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -12.7% | -9.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -23.9% | -14.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 17% | -26.6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 52.2% | -15.8% |
| Year to date | 40.5% | -29% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 25.3% | -32.4% |
Technicals
BLMN has the stronger structure| Metric | BLMN | BROS |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 32.3 | 31.1 |
| ADX (14) | 22.5 | 32.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -8.9% | -24% |
| Price vs 200-day | 15.5% | -21.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 60.9% | 43% |
Risk
Split| Metric | BLMN | BROS |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.32 | 1.4 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.6 | -0.62 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.25 | -0.9 |
| Max drawdown | -34.8% | -40.7% |
| Current drawdown | -26.8% | -40.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 77.8% | 51.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.7% | -4.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BLMN or BROS?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, BLMN is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 41 against BROS's 27. The edge comes from value and momentum. BROS 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 BLMN or BROS the better buy right now?
BLMN 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 BLMN over BROS?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. BLMN leads Value by 48 points; BROS leads Quality by 7 points; BLMN leads Momentum by 7 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BLMN or BROS?
Analyst price targets imply +20.8% upside for BLMN and +76.4% for BROS, so the Street currently favors BROS. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors BLMN. 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, BLMN or BROS?
BLMN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. BLMN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 48 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, BLMN or BROS?
BROS 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, BLMN or BROS?
BLMN on the Momentum factor, by 7 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, BLMN or BROS?
BROS is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. BROS 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 BLMN more profitable than BROS?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 40.1% vs 25%; operating margin 1.3% vs 9.7%; ttm roe 7.4% vs 13%. BLMN leads on one measure and BROS 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 BLMN's lead over BROS getting stronger or weaker?
BLMN lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 25 to 14 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 BLMN vs BROS verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: BROS closes the Value gap — currently 48 points behind, the largest single contributor to BLMN's edge; BROS's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; BLMN's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 11 points over 30 sessions, and a further 14-point move would eliminate BLMN's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about BLMN and BROS?
BLMN: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. BROS: 2 bullish / 3 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 BLMN is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On BROS it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare BLMN and BROS 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.