BLNK vs CHPT Stock Comparison
Compare BLNK and CHPT across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between BLNK and CHPT?
CHPT leads the current stock comparison as ChargePoint Holdings, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Blink Charging Co. vs ChargePoint Holdings, Inc.
CHPT leads
CHPT leads by 13 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Quality, having only recently taken the lead back from BLNK. Wall Street currently favors BLNK on target upside.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support CHPT, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Blink Charging Co.
ChargePoint Holdings, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CHPT over BLNK, 57 versus 44 as of Sep 11, 2026. CHPT's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and quality. CHPT also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors BLNK. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CHPT today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. CHPT lead: Reversed — BLNK led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; CHPT now leads by 13.
Compare Blink Charging Co. and ChargePoint Holdings, 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 BLNK and CHPT 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.
- Momentum37 vs 80CHPT +43
- Quality38 vs 44CHPT +6
- Risk Resilience29 vs 27Even
- Value65 vs 65Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor CHPT. CHPT’s edge is concentrated in momentum 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 -1
New signals
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
CHPT's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BLNK and CHPT both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CHPT (ChargePoint Holdings, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and quality.
BLNK (Blink Charging Co.): the counter-case, on 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
CHPTCHPT on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
BLNKBLNK on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
CHPTCHPT on the Momentum factor, by 43 points.
Lower downside
EvenDownside measures are level or not covered.
Analyst upside
BLNKBLNK on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors CHPT, analyst targets favor BLNK. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | BLNK | CHPT | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +175.6% | -11.7% | BLNK has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 1 | 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 CHPT. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | CHPT | 44 vs 57 |
| Fundamentals | BLNKon balance | revenue growth 4.3% vs -6.9%; EPS growth 50.5% vs 5.4%; TTM ROE -75.2% vs -6.8%; gross margin 20.5% vs 30.6%; operating margin -43.4% vs -49% — BLNK takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 65 vs 65 |
| Technicals | CHPT | Price vs 50-day -3.7% vs 47.7%; vs 200-day -24.6% vs 37.5% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 29 vs 27 |
| Analyst expectations | BLNK | Target upside 175.6% vs -11.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BLNK and CHPT 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 13 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 CHPT.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10CHPT lead: Reversed — BLNK led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; CHPT now leads by 13.
- Today
- CHPT +13
- 44 vs 57
- 7 sessions ago
- CHPT +8
- 49 vs 57
- 30 sessions ago
- BLNK +1
- 49 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- CHPT +3
- 42 vs 45
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Aug 27 when CHPT moved ahead of BLNK.
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.
0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (26.23%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (6.22%)
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (5.90%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
CHPT 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.
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.19%, AIQ -1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +1.46%, 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.
- 1BLNK closes the Momentum gap — currently 43 points behind, the largest single contributor to CHPT's edge.
- 2BLNK's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3CHPT's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 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
BLNK leads on balance| Metric | BLNK | CHPT |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 4.3% | -6.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 50.5% | 5.4% |
| Gross margin | 20.5% | 30.6% |
| Operating margin | -43.4% | -49% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -75.2% | -6.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.09 | -27.38 |
Performance
CHPT leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | BLNK | CHPT |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 3.7% | 72.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -8.9% | 39.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -19.8% | 39.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -21.2% | 61.8% |
| Year to date | -19.4% | 34.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -51.1% | -17.7% |
Technicals
CHPT has the stronger structure| Metric | BLNK | CHPT |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 44.1 | 71.2 |
| ADX (14) | 16.6 | 26.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | -3.7% | 47.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | -24.6% | 37.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 70.2% | — |
Risk
Split| Metric | BLNK | CHPT |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 3.3 | 3.26 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.4 | 0.24 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.83 | 0.55 |
| Max drawdown | -81.2% | -63.5% |
| Current drawdown | -78.5% | -27.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 93.3% | 104.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -7.8% | -6.9% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BLNK or CHPT?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CHPT is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 57 against BLNK's 44. The edge comes from momentum 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 BLNK or CHPT the better buy right now?
CHPT 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 CHPT over BLNK?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CHPT leads Momentum by 43 points; CHPT leads Quality by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BLNK or CHPT?
Analyst price targets imply +175.6% upside for BLNK and -11.7% for CHPT, so the Street currently favors BLNK. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors CHPT. 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, BLNK or CHPT?
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, BLNK or CHPT?
BLNK 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, BLNK or CHPT?
CHPT on the Momentum factor, by 43 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, BLNK or CHPT?
The two are close on downside measures. Downside measures are level or not covered. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is BLNK more profitable than CHPT?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 20.5% vs 30.6%; operating margin -43.4% vs -49%; ttm roe -75.2% vs -6.8%. BLNK leads on one measure and CHPT 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 CHPT's lead over BLNK getting stronger or weaker?
CHPT lead: Reversed — BLNK led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; CHPT now leads by 13. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-27, when CHPT moved ahead of BLNK.
What would change the BLNK vs CHPT verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: BLNK closes the Momentum gap — currently 43 points behind, the largest single contributor to CHPT's edge; BLNK's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; CHPT's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 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 BLNK and CHPT?
BLNK: 0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral. CHPT: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 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 BLNK is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On CHPT it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare BLNK and CHPT 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.