CBOE vs EVR Stock Comparison
EVR currently leads CBOE in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 68 vs 58. The clearest difference is value.
What is the main difference between CBOE and EVR?
EVR leads the current stock comparison as Evercore Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Cboe Global Markets, Inc. vs Evercore Inc.
EVR leads
EVR leads by 10 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, and the lead has widened from 4 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support EVR, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Cboe Global Markets, Inc.
Evercore Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors EVR over CBOE, 68 versus 58 as of Oct 31, 2026. EVR's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality. EVR also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor EVR today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. EVR lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 10 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Cboe Global Markets, Inc. and Evercore 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 CBOE and EVR 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.
- Value26 vs 46EVR +20
- Quality75 vs 91EVR +16
- Momentum80 vs 78Even
- Risk Resilience49 vs 51Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor EVR. EVR’s edge is concentrated in value and quality.
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 4 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
EVR's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CBOE and EVR both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
EVR (Evercore Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
CBOE (Cboe Global Markets, Inc.): the counter-case, on fundamentals, 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
EVREVR on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CBOECBOE on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EVREVR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 20 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
CBOECBOE carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
EVREVR 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 | CBOE | EVR | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -0.5% | +69.7% | EVR has more room |
| Target dispersion | +57.5% | +158.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 7 | 5 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | CBOE | EVR |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 11.60% | 7.16% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $1.560 | $2.350 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $2.700 | $3.320 |
| Years increased | 5 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #67 | #183 |
CBOE grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 11.60% a year against EVR's 7.16%. Neither company reduced its regular dividend in any year of the window.
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
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor EVR. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | EVR | 58 vs 68 |
| Fundamentals | CBOEon balance | revenue growth 13.4% vs -28.7%; EPS growth -8.4% vs -68%; TTM ROE 25.7% vs 39.8%; gross margin 52.3% vs 98.5%; operating margin 35.2% vs 22.1% — CBOE takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | EVR | Value 26 vs 46 |
| Technicals | CBOE | Price vs 50-day 14.5% vs 6.9%; vs 200-day 9.8% vs -7.6% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 49 vs 51 |
| Analyst expectations | EVR | Target upside -0.5% vs 69.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CBOE and EVR 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 moderate at 10 points.
- 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)
- Analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. (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 EVR.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jul 1 – Oct 30EVR lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 10 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- EVR +10
- 58 vs 68
- 7 sessions ago
- CBOE +3
- 61 vs 58
- 30 sessions ago
- EVR +4
- 60 vs 64
- 90 sessions ago
- EVR +1
- 59 vs 60
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Oct 15 when CBOE moved ahead of EVR.
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.
4 bullish / 0 bearish
Only CBOE
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.40%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only EVR
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (16.50%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.60%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
EVR 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 +6.77%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -2.38%, 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.
- 1CBOE closes the Value gap — currently 20 points behind, the largest single contributor to EVR's edge.
- 2CBOE's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed.
- 3EVR's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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
CBOE leads on balance| Metric | CBOE | EVR |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 13.4% | -28.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -8.4% | -68% |
| Gross margin | 52.3% | 98.5% |
| Operating margin | 35.2% | 22.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 25.7% | 39.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.28 | 0.59 |
Performance
CBOE leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | CBOE | EVR |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.5% | 11.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 16.4% | 13.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 8.1% | -6.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 4.8% | -9.8% |
| Year to date | 27.7% | -14.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 34.2% | -9.8% |
Technicals
CBOE has the stronger structure| Metric | CBOE | EVR |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 62.3 | 65 |
| ADX (14) | 32 | 29.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 14.5% | 6.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 9.8% | -7.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 38.4% | 51.2% |
Risk
Split| Metric | CBOE | EVR |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.42 | 1.75 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.9 | -0.15 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.21 | -0.2 |
| Max drawdown | -36.9% | -35.3% |
| Current drawdown | -12.6% | -23.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 35.9% | 39.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.2% | -4.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CBOE or EVR?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, EVR is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 68 against CBOE's 58. The edge comes from value and quality. 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 CBOE or EVR the better buy right now?
EVR carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor EVR over CBOE?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. EVR leads Value by 20 points; EVR leads Quality by 16 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CBOE or EVR?
Analyst price targets imply -0.5% upside for CBOE and +69.7% for EVR, so the Street currently favors EVR. 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, CBOE or EVR?
EVR is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. EVR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 20 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, CBOE or EVR?
CBOE 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, CBOE or EVR?
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, CBOE or EVR?
CBOE is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CBOE carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is CBOE more profitable than EVR?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 52.3% vs 98.5%; operating margin 35.2% vs 22.1%; ttm roe 25.7% vs 39.8%. CBOE leads on one measure and EVR 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 EVR's lead over CBOE getting stronger or weaker?
EVR lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 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 changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-15, when CBOE moved ahead of EVR.
What would change the CBOE vs EVR verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CBOE closes the Value gap — currently 20 points behind, the largest single contributor to EVR's edge; CBOE's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed; EVR's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 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 CBOE and EVR?
CBOE: 4 bullish / 0 bearish. EVR: 2 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 CBOE is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On EVR it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare CBOE and EVR 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.