CARR vs CMI Stock Comparison
CMI currently leads CARR in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 59 vs 50. The clearest difference is quality.
What is the main difference between CARR and CMI?
CMI leads the current stock comparison as Cummins Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Carrier Global Corporation vs Cummins Inc.
CMI leads
CMI leads by 9 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support CMI, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Carrier Global Corporation
Cummins Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CMI over CARR, 59 versus 50 as of Oct 21, 2026. CMI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum. CMI also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CMI today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. CMI lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 9 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Carrier Global Corporation and Cummins 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 CARR and CMI 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.
- Quality36 vs 54CMI +18
- Momentum50 vs 62CMI +12
- Risk Resilience58 vs 64CMI +6
- Value59 vs 59Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor CMI. CMI’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +9
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +10
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
CMI's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CARR and CMI both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CMI (Cummins Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
CARR (Carrier Global Corporation): the counter-case, on technicals.
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
CMICMI on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CARRCARR on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
CMICMI on the Momentum factor, by 12 points.
Lower downside
CMICMI on Risk Resilience, by 6 points.
Analyst upside
CMICMI 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 | CARR | CMI | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +27.5% | +46.6% | CMI has more room |
| Target dispersion | +26.4% | +25.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 6 | 10 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | CARR | CMI |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 19.24% | 7.66% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $0.280 | $5.283 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $0.675 | $7.640 |
| Years increased | 4 | 5 |
| No cut in window | No (1) | Yes |
| Cohort rank | not ranked | #154 |
CARR grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 19.24% a year against CMI's 7.66%. CMI never reduced its regular dividend in the window; CARR did in 1 year.
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 CMI. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | CMI | 50 vs 59 |
| Fundamentals | CMIon balance | revenue growth 18.9% vs 12.6%; EPS growth 106.9% vs 42.7%; TTM ROE 8.9% vs 21.9%; gross margin 24.3% vs 25.3%; operating margin 7.1% vs 11.1% — CMI takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 59 vs 59 |
| Technicals | CARR | Price vs 50-day -1.6% vs -2%; vs 200-day -9% vs -11.3% |
| Risk Resilience | CMI | Risk Resilience 58 vs 64 |
| Analyst expectations | CMI | Target upside 27.5% vs 46.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CARR and CMI 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 9 points.
- 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 CMI.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20CMI lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 9 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- CMI +9
- 50 vs 59
- 7 sessions ago
- CMI +12
- 46 vs 58
- 30 sessions ago
- CMI +7
- 44 vs 51
- 90 sessions ago
- CMI +8
- 46 vs 54
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Jul 15 when CMI moved ahead of CARR.
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 / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only CARR
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
No signal that the other name lacks.
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, Downtrend Structure Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
CMI 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 and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.53%, AIQ +3 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +1.12%, 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.
- 1CARR closes the Quality gap — currently 18 points behind, the largest single contributor to CMI's edge.
- 2CARR's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3CMI'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
CMI leads on balance| Metric | CARR | CMI |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 18.9% | 12.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 106.9% | 42.7% |
| Gross margin | 24.3% | 25.3% |
| Operating margin | 7.1% | 11.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 8.9% | 21.9% |
| Debt to equity | 0.94 | 0.64 |
Performance
CARR leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | CARR | CMI |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.1% | 1.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 1.6% | 1.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -17.5% | -18.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -9% | -15.4% |
| Year to date | 6.3% | 5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -1.7% | 26.9% |
Technicals
CARR has the stronger structure| Metric | CARR | CMI |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 59.5 | 60.5 |
| ADX (14) | 17.8 | 40.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1.6% | -2% |
| Price vs 200-day | -9% | -11.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 18.6% | 23.1% |
Risk
CMI is the more resilient| Metric | CARR | CMI |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.31 | 1.59 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.07 | 0.8 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.09 | 1.18 |
| Max drawdown | -29.1% | -29% |
| Current drawdown | -26.1% | -26.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 35.6% | 36.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.2% | -3.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CARR or CMI?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CMI is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 59 against CARR's 50. The edge comes from quality and momentum. 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 CARR or CMI the better buy right now?
CMI carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 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 CMI over CARR?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CMI leads Quality by 18 points; CMI leads Momentum by 12 points; CMI leads Risk Resilience by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CARR or CMI?
Analyst price targets imply +27.5% upside for CARR and +46.6% for CMI, so the Street currently favors CMI. 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, CARR or CMI?
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, CARR or CMI?
CARR 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, CARR or CMI?
CMI on the Momentum factor, by 12 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, CARR or CMI?
CMI is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CMI on Risk Resilience, by 6 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 CARR more profitable than CMI?
CMI leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 24.3% vs 25.3%; operating margin 7.1% vs 11.1%; ttm roe 8.9% vs 21.9%.
Is CMI's lead over CARR getting stronger or weaker?
CMI lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 9 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-15, when CMI moved ahead of CARR.
What would change the CARR vs CMI verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CARR closes the Quality gap — currently 18 points behind, the largest single contributor to CMI's edge; CARR's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; CMI'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 CARR and CMI?
CARR: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. CMI: 1 bullish / 2 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 CARR is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On CMI it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare CARR and CMI 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.