BRT vs DEI Stock Comparison
BRT Apartments Corp. vs Douglas Emmett, Inc.
DEI leads
DEI leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience, having only recently taken the lead back from BRT. Wall Street currently favors BRT on target upside.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support DEI, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
BRT Apartments Corp.
Douglas Emmett, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors DEI over BRT, 46 versus 43 as of Sep 5, 2026. DEI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while BRT holds the stronger momentum profile. DEI also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors BRT. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor DEI today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. DEI lead: Reversed — BRT led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; DEI now leads by 3.
Compare BRT Apartments Corp. and Douglas Emmett, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Compare BRT and DEI 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.
- Quality30%13 vs 28DEI +15
- Momentum25%53 vs 38BRT +15
- Risk Resilience15%48 vs 62DEI +14
- Value30%61 vs 64Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor DEI. DEI’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; BRT keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-03, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-02.
Largest factor move: Momentum +8
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +2
No new signals fired.
DEI's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BRT and DEI both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
DEI (Douglas Emmett, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
BRT (BRT Apartments Corp.): the counter-case, on momentum, 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
DEIDEI on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
DEIDEI on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
BRTBRT on the Momentum factor, by 15 points.
Lower downside
DEIDEI on Risk Resilience, by 14 points.
Analyst upside
BRTBRT on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors DEI, analyst targets favor BRT. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | BRT | DEI | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +46.3% | +13.8% | BRT has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | +15.4% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 2 | 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 DEI. 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 | 43 vs 46 |
| Fundamentals | DEI | revenue growth -0.5% vs 2.2%; EPS growth -35.7% vs -7.4%; TTM ROE -7.5% vs -1.2%; gross margin 28% vs 63.2%; operating margin 12.8% vs 19% |
| Valuation | Even | Value 61 vs 64 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day -2.8% vs -4.3%; vs 200-day 0.7% vs 1% |
| Risk Resilience | DEI | Risk Resilience 48 vs 62 |
| Analyst expectations | BRT | Target upside 46.3% vs 13.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BRT and DEI 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 3 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 DEI.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 22 – Sep 3DEI lead: Reversed — BRT led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; DEI now leads by 3.
- Today
- DEI +3
- 43 vs 46
- 7 sessions ago
- BRT +4
- 53 vs 49
- 30 sessions ago
- BRT +2
- 47 vs 45
- 90 sessions ago
- BRT +13
- 59 vs 46
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Sep 2 when DEI moved ahead of BRT.
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 / 0 bearish
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (1.34%)
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.84%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
DEI 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 down while the AIQ Score moved up 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -2.18%, AIQ +2 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +1.24%, 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.
- 1BRT closes the Quality gap — currently 15 points behind, the largest single contributor to DEI's edge.
- 2BRT generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active.
- 3DEI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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
DEI leads on balance| Metric | BRT | DEI |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -0.5% | 2.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -35.7% | -7.4% |
| Gross margin | 28% | 63.2% |
| Operating margin | 12.8% | 19% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -7.5% | -1.2% |
| Debt to equity | 3.17 | 3.12 |
Technicals
Split| Metric | BRT | DEI |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 56 | 38.4 |
| ADX (14) | 11 | 13.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | -2.8% | -4.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | 0.7% | 1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 22.1% | 21.1% |
Risk
DEI is the more resilient| Metric | BRT | DEI |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.19 | 0.66 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.33 | -1.2 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.5 | -2.03 |
| Max drawdown | -20.2% | -45.7% |
| Current drawdown | -11.4% | -33.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 22.1% | 29.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.4% | -3.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BRT or DEI?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, DEI is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 46 against BRT's 43. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. BRT is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 BRT or DEI the better buy right now?
DEI carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor DEI over BRT?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. DEI leads Quality by 15 points; BRT leads Momentum by 15 points; DEI leads Risk Resilience by 14 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BRT or DEI?
Analyst price targets imply +46.3% upside for BRT and +13.8% for DEI, so the Street currently favors BRT. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors DEI. 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, BRT or DEI?
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, BRT or DEI?
DEI 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, BRT or DEI?
BRT on the Momentum factor, by 15 points. Momentum carries 25% of 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, BRT or DEI?
DEI is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. DEI on Risk Resilience, by 14 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is BRT more profitable than DEI?
DEI leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 28% vs 63.2%; operating margin 12.8% vs 19%; ttm roe -7.5% vs -1.2%.
Is DEI's lead over BRT getting stronger or weaker?
DEI lead: Reversed — BRT led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; DEI now leads by 3. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-22 and 2026-09-03. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-09-02, when DEI moved ahead of BRT.
What would change the BRT vs DEI verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: BRT closes the Quality gap — currently 15 points behind, the largest single contributor to DEI's edge; BRT generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish or Uptrend Structure Active; DEI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about BRT and DEI?
BRT: 2 bullish / 0 bearish. DEI: 1 bullish / 1 bearish, 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 BRT is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On DEI it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare BRT and DEI with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.