BLNK vs CLNE Stock Comparison
Compare BLNK and CLNE across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between BLNK and CLNE?
BLNK leads the current stock comparison as Blink Charging Co., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Blink Charging Co. vs Clean Energy Fuels Corp.
BLNK leads
BLNK leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 10 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support BLNK, and its lead is narrowing.
Blink Charging Co.
Clean Energy Fuels Corp.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors BLNK over CLNE, 44 versus 43 as of Sep 11, 2026. BLNK's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while CLNE holds the stronger risk resilience profile. BLNK also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BLNK today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. BLNK lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 1 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Blink Charging Co. and Clean Energy Fuels Corp. 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 CLNE 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.
- Quality38 vs 30BLNK +8
- Risk Resilience29 vs 37CLNE +8
- Momentum37 vs 40Even
- Value65 vs 63Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor BLNK. BLNK’s edge is concentrated in quality; CLNE 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.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1
New signals
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -7
New signals
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (2.6%)
BLNK'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 CLNE both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
BLNK (Blink Charging Co.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
CLNE (Clean Energy Fuels Corp.): the counter-case, on risk resilience.
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
BLNKBLNK 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
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
CLNECLNE on Risk Resilience, by 8 points.
Analyst upside
BLNKBLNK 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 | BLNK | CLNE | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +175.6% | +46% | BLNK has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +35.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 3 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BLNK. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 44 vs 43 |
| Fundamentals | BLNKon balance | revenue growth 4.3% vs -9%; EPS growth 50.5% vs -23.9%; TTM ROE -75.2% vs -16.7%; gross margin 20.5% vs 19.1%; operating margin -43.4% vs -7.3% — BLNK takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 65 vs 63 |
| Technicals | BLNK | Price vs 50-day -3.7% vs -13%; vs 200-day -24.6% vs -25.6% |
| Risk Resilience | CLNE | Risk Resilience 29 vs 37 |
| Analyst expectations | BLNK | Target upside 175.6% vs 46% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BLNK and CLNE 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 1 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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)
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 BLNK.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10BLNK lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 1 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- BLNK +1
- 44 vs 43
- 7 sessions ago
- BLNK +5
- 49 vs 44
- 30 sessions ago
- BLNK +10
- 49 vs 39
- 90 sessions ago
- CLNE +9
- 42 vs 51
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Sep 3 when BLNK moved ahead of CLNE.
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%)
1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (14.06%)
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (2.6%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
CLNE 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 up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.19%, AIQ -1 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +2.52%, AIQ -2 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.
- 1CLNE closes the Quality gap — currently 8 points behind, the largest single contributor to BLNK's edge.
- 2CLNE's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3BLNK starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 9 points over 30 sessions, and a further 1-point move would eliminate BLNK'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
BLNK leads on balance| Metric | BLNK | CLNE |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 4.3% | -9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 50.5% | -23.9% |
| Gross margin | 20.5% | 19.1% |
| Operating margin | -43.4% | -7.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -75.2% | -16.7% |
| Debt to equity | 0.09 | 0.58 |
Performance
BLNK leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | BLNK | CLNE |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 3.7% | -7.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -8.9% | -8.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -19.8% | -20.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -21.2% | -27.7% |
| Year to date | -19.4% | -24.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -51.1% | -35.4% |
Technicals
BLNK has the stronger structure| Metric | BLNK | CLNE |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 44.1 | 48.1 |
| ADX (14) | 16.6 | 20.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | -3.7% | -13% |
| Price vs 200-day | -24.6% | -25.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 70.2% | 56.9% |
Risk
CLNE is the more resilient| Metric | BLNK | CLNE |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 3.3 | 0.07 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.4 | -0.63 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.83 | -0.89 |
| Max drawdown | -81.2% | -48.7% |
| Current drawdown | -78.5% | -48% |
| Annualized volatility | 93.3% | 53.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -7.8% | -4.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BLNK or CLNE?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, BLNK is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 44 against CLNE's 43. The edge comes from quality. CLNE 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 BLNK or CLNE the better buy right now?
BLNK 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: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor BLNK over CLNE?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. BLNK leads Quality by 8 points; CLNE leads Risk Resilience by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BLNK or CLNE?
Analyst price targets imply +175.6% upside for BLNK and +46% for CLNE, so the Street currently favors BLNK. 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, BLNK or CLNE?
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 CLNE?
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 CLNE?
The two are level on Momentum. 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 CLNE?
CLNE is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CLNE on Risk Resilience, by 8 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 BLNK more profitable than CLNE?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 20.5% vs 19.1%; operating margin -43.4% vs -7.3%; ttm roe -75.2% vs -16.7%. BLNK leads on one measure and CLNE 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 BLNK's lead over CLNE getting stronger or weaker?
BLNK lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 10 to 1 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-03, when BLNK moved ahead of CLNE.
What would change the BLNK vs CLNE verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CLNE closes the Quality gap — currently 8 points behind, the largest single contributor to BLNK's edge; CLNE's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; BLNK starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 9 points over 30 sessions, and a further 1-point move would eliminate BLNK's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about BLNK and CLNE?
BLNK: 0 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral. CLNE: 1 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 BLNK is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On CLNE it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare BLNK and CLNE 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.