CAT vs URI Stock Comparison
URI currently leads CAT in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 50 vs 36. The clearest difference is momentum, while CAT has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between CAT and URI?
URI leads the current stock comparison as United Rentals, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Caterpillar Inc. vs United Rentals, Inc.
URI leads
URI leads by 14 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, and the lead has widened from 0 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors CAT on target upside.
Competitive: 3 of 6 evidence groups support URI, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Caterpillar Inc.
United Rentals, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors URI over CAT, 50 versus 36 as of Oct 22, 2026. URI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while CAT holds the stronger risk resilience profile. URI also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors CAT. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor URI today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. URI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 0 to 14 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Caterpillar Inc. and United Rentals, 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 CAT and URI 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.
- Momentum8 vs 52URI +44
- Value38 vs 54URI +16
- Risk Resilience42 vs 34CAT +8
- Quality55 vs 51CAT +4
3 of 6 evidence groups favor URI. URI’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; CAT keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +7
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
URI's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CAT and URI both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
URI (United Rentals, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
CAT (Caterpillar Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, quality, 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
URIURI on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CATCAT on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
URIURI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 16 points.
Momentum
URIURI on the Momentum factor, by 44 points.
Lower downside
CATCAT on Risk Resilience, by 8 points.
Analyst upside
CATCAT on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors URI, analyst targets favor CAT. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | CAT | URI | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +34.3% | +18.2% | CAT has more room |
| Target dispersion | +47.9% | +37.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 12 | 12 | 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
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor URI. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | URI | 36 vs 50 |
| Fundamentals | Even | revenue growth 18% vs 10.7%; EPS growth 41.8% vs 41.8%; TTM ROE 54.1% vs 29.2%; gross margin 33.9% vs 37.1%; operating margin 17.5% vs 24.8% |
| Valuation | URI | Value 38 vs 54 |
| Technicals | URI | Price vs 50-day -8.4% vs 2%; vs 200-day -9.9% vs 8.5% |
| Risk Resilience | CAT | Risk Resilience 42 vs 34 |
| Analyst expectations | CAT | Target upside 34.3% vs 18.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CAT and URI 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 wide at 14 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (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 URI.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20URI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 0 to 14 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- URI +14
- 36 vs 50
- 7 sessions ago
- URI +14
- 36 vs 50
- 30 sessions ago
- Level
- 52 vs 52
- 90 sessions ago
- URI +4
- 51 vs 55
The lead changed hands 7 times in this window, most recently on Sep 16 when URI moved ahead of CAT.
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 / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only CAT
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.71%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only URI
- EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, MACD Bearish Crossover.
URI 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 +2.06%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +2.41%, 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.
- 1CAT closes the Momentum gap — currently 44 points behind, the largest single contributor to URI's edge.
- 2CAT's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3URI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 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
Split| Metric | CAT | URI |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 18% | 10.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 41.8% | 41.8% |
| Gross margin | 33.9% | 37.1% |
| Operating margin | 17.5% | 24.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 54.1% | 29.2% |
| Debt to equity | 2.33 | 1.67 |
Performance
URI leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | CAT | URI |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -6.2% | -1.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -10.2% | 0.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -18.4% | 0.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -8.2% | 29.5% |
| Year to date | 26.6% | 29% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 35.1% | 3.8% |
Technicals
URI has the stronger structure| Metric | CAT | URI |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 28.6 | 59 |
| ADX (14) | 22.1 | 15.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -8.4% | 2% |
| Price vs 200-day | -9.9% | 8.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 32.4% | 33.1% |
Risk
CAT is the more resilient| Metric | CAT | URI |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.8 | 0.96 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.9 | 0.27 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.44 | 0.43 |
| Max drawdown | -31.9% | -29.1% |
| Current drawdown | -31.9% | -10.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 40.2% | 43.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4% | -3.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CAT or URI?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, URI is the stronger of the two as of Oct 22, 2026, scoring 50 against CAT's 36. The edge comes from momentum and value. CAT 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 CAT or URI the better buy right now?
URI carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 22, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 3 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 URI over CAT?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. URI leads Momentum by 44 points; URI leads Value by 16 points; CAT leads Risk Resilience by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CAT or URI?
Analyst price targets imply +34.3% upside for CAT and +18.2% for URI, so the Street currently favors CAT. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors URI. 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, CAT or URI?
URI is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. URI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 16 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, CAT or URI?
CAT 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, CAT or URI?
URI on the Momentum factor, by 44 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, CAT or URI?
CAT is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CAT 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 CAT more profitable than URI?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 33.9% vs 37.1%; operating margin 17.5% vs 24.8%; ttm roe 54.1% vs 29.2%. CAT leads on one measure and URI 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 URI's lead over CAT getting stronger or weaker?
URI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 0 to 14 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 7 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-16, when URI moved ahead of CAT.
What would change the CAT vs URI verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CAT closes the Momentum gap — currently 44 points behind, the largest single contributor to URI's edge; CAT's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; URI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 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 CAT and URI?
CAT: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. URI: 2 bullish / 1 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 CAT is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On URI it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare CAT and URI 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.