BX vs CG Stock Comparison
BX currently leads CG in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 51 vs 41. The clearest difference is quality, while CG has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between BX and CG?
BX leads the current stock comparison as Blackstone Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Blackstone Inc. vs The Carlyle Group Inc.
BX leads
BX leads by 10 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience, and the lead has widened from 7 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors CG on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support BX, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Blackstone Inc.
The Carlyle Group Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors BX over CG, 51 versus 41 as of Oct 31, 2026. BX's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while CG holds the stronger value profile. BX also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors CG. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BX today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. BX lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 7 to 10 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Blackstone Inc. and The Carlyle Group Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare BX and CG 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.
- Quality76 vs 36BX +40
- Value28 vs 45CG +17
- Risk Resilience42 vs 32BX +10
- Momentum53 vs 46BX +7
4 of 6 evidence groups favor BX. BX’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; CG keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-30, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-29.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
BX's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — BX and CG both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
BX (Blackstone Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
CG (The Carlyle Group Inc.): the counter-case, on value, valuation, 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
BXBX on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CGCG on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CGCG on the peer-relative Value factor, by 17 points.
Momentum
BXBX on the Momentum factor, by 7 points.
Lower downside
BXBX on Risk Resilience, by 10 points.
Analyst upside
CGCG on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors BX, analyst targets favor CG. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | BX | CG | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +16.1% | +34.6% | CG has more room |
| Target dispersion | +37.1% | +49.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 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.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | BX | CG |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 24.71% | 6.96% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $1.370 | $1.000 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $4.132 | $1.400 |
| Years increased | 4 | 3 |
| No cut in window | No (1) | Yes |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | not ranked |
BX grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 24.71% a year against CG's 6.96%. CG never reduced its regular dividend in the window; BX did in 1 year. They are ranked in different cohorts — variable-dividend payers and US dividend-paying corporations — so their ranks are not comparable with each other.
Yield and payout ratio shown elsewhere on this page are current values, not part of the study window.
Split-adjusted regular dividends per share, 2020–2025, excluding special dividends. Research as of Sep 19, 2026.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor BX. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | BX | 51 vs 41 |
| Fundamentals | BXon balance | revenue growth -35.8% vs 5.1%; EPS growth -47.1% vs 202.7%; TTM ROE 40.8% vs 6.1%; gross margin 89.7% vs 70.7%; operating margin 52% vs 19.1% — BX takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | CG | Value 28 vs 45 |
| Technicals | BX | Price vs 50-day -4.1% vs -3.9%; vs 200-day -6% vs -17.7% |
| Risk Resilience | BX | Risk Resilience 42 vs 32 |
| Analyst expectations | CG | Target upside 16.1% vs 34.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of BX and CG and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is moderate at 10 points.
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 BX.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jul 1 – Oct 30BX lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 7 to 10 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- BX +10
- 51 vs 41
- 7 sessions ago
- BX +12
- 51 vs 39
- 30 sessions ago
- BX +7
- 44 vs 37
- 90 sessions ago
- BX +9
- 53 vs 44
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.
1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
No signal that the other name lacks.
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only CG
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, Downtrend Structure Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
BX 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 -1.73%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.96%, 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.
- 1CG closes the Quality gap — currently 40 points behind, the largest single contributor to BX's edge.
- 2CG's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3BX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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
BX leads on balance| Metric | BX | CG |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -35.8% | 5.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -47.1% | 202.7% |
| Gross margin | 89.7% | 70.7% |
| Operating margin | 52% | 19.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 40.8% | 6.1% |
| Debt to equity | 1.61 | 1.98 |
Performance
BX leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | BX | CG |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 6.8% | 4.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 4.4% | -1.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -8.6% | -13.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -2.3% | -18.3% |
| Year to date | -24.1% | -33.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -24.3% | -33.2% |
Technicals
BX has the stronger structure| Metric | BX | CG |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 56.3 | 53.9 |
| ADX (14) | 31.7 | 25.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | -4.1% | -3.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | -6% | -17.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 42.2% | 34% |
Risk
BX is the more resilient| Metric | BX | CG |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.34 | 1.48 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.62 | -0.98 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.94 | -1.5 |
| Max drawdown | -37.5% | -45.9% |
| Current drawdown | -28.4% | -40.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 37.3% | 36.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4% | -4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, BX or CG?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, BX is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 51 against CG's 41. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. CG is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 BX or CG the better buy right now?
BX carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor BX over CG?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. BX leads Quality by 40 points; CG leads Value by 17 points; BX leads Risk Resilience by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, BX or CG?
Analyst price targets imply +16.1% upside for BX and +34.6% for CG, so the Street currently favors CG. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors BX. 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, BX or CG?
CG is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CG on the peer-relative Value factor, by 17 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, BX or CG?
CG 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, BX or CG?
BX 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, BX or CG?
BX is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. BX on Risk Resilience, by 10 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 BX more profitable than CG?
BX leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 89.7% vs 70.7%; operating margin 52% vs 19.1%; ttm roe 40.8% vs 6.1%.
Is BX's lead over CG getting stronger or weaker?
BX lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 7 to 10 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-07-01 and 2026-10-30. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the BX vs CG verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CG closes the Quality gap — currently 40 points behind, the largest single contributor to BX's edge; CG's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; BX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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 BX and CG?
BX: 1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. CG: 1 bullish / 2 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 BX is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On CG it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare BX and CG 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.