CCI vs EQIX Stock Comparison
Compare CCI and EQIX across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between CCI and EQIX?
CCI leads the current stock comparison as Crown Castle Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Crown Castle Inc. vs Equinix, Inc.
CCI leads
CCI leads by 16 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, having only recently taken the lead back from EQIX.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support CCI, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Crown Castle Inc.
Equinix, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CCI over EQIX, 49 versus 33 as of Sep 11, 2026. CCI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality. CCI also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CCI today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. CCI lead: Reversed — EQIX led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; CCI now leads by 16.
Compare Crown Castle Inc. and Equinix, Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price-return comparison using available daily close history.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000
Based on available close-price history. Distribution reinvestment is not added unless already reflected in the source series.
Compare CCI and EQIX 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.
- Value48 vs 25CCI +23
- Quality58 vs 40CCI +18
- Momentum35 vs 20CCI +15
- Risk Resilience55 vs 57Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor CCI. CCI’s edge is concentrated in value and quality.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Momentum -10
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -7
No new signals fired.
CCI's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CCI and EQIX both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CCI (Crown Castle Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
EQIX (Equinix, Inc.): 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
CCICCI on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CCICCI on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CCICCI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 23 points.
Momentum
CCICCI on the Momentum factor, by 15 points.
Lower downside
CCICCI carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | CCI | EQIX | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +18.4% | +18.1% | Level |
| Target dispersion | +12.3% | +23.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 2 | 15 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CCI. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | CCI | 49 vs 33 |
| Fundamentals | CCIon balance | EPS growth 108.8% vs 15.2%; TTM ROE -51.7% vs 10.8%; gross margin 63.2% vs 51.6%; operating margin 47.7% vs 21.8% — CCI takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | CCI | Value 48 vs 25 |
| Technicals | EQIX | Price vs 50-day -0.7% vs -0.6%; vs 200-day -12.6% vs 6.4% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 55 vs 57 |
| Analyst expectations | Even | Target upside 18.4% vs 18.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CCI and EQIX 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 wide at 16 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Only 3 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 lead has swung materially session to session. (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 CCI.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10CCI lead: Reversed — EQIX led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; CCI now leads by 16.
- Today
- CCI +16
- 49 vs 33
- 7 sessions ago
- CCI +20
- 52 vs 32
- 30 sessions ago
- EQIX +3
- 46 vs 49
- 90 sessions ago
- CCI +8
- 42 vs 34
The lead changed hands 8 times in this window, most recently on Aug 24 when CCI moved ahead of EQIX.
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
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (10.99%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (8.11%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
CCI 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 up while the AIQ Score moved down 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +2.37%, AIQ -2 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.36%, 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.
- 1EQIX closes the Value gap — currently 23 points behind, the largest single contributor to CCI's edge.
- 2EQIX's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3CCI'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
CCI leads on balance| Metric | CCI | EQIX |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -0.2% | 7.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 108.8% | 15.2% |
| Gross margin | 63.2% | 51.6% |
| Operating margin | 47.7% | 21.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -51.7% | 10.8% |
| Debt to equity | -7.16 | 1.62 |
Performance
EQIX leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | CCI | EQIX |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2% | 0.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.1% | -4.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -19.2% | -1.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -15.6% | 5.2% |
| Year to date | -16.9% | 33.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -21.3% | 33.7% |
Technicals
EQIX has the stronger structure| Metric | CCI | EQIX |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 42.2 | 32.7 |
| ADX (14) | 17.9 | 12.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | -0.7% | -0.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -12.6% | 6.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 20.4% | 22.1% |
Risk
Split| Metric | CCI | EQIX |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.09 | 0.44 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.81 | 1.07 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.1 | 2 |
| Max drawdown | -25.6% | -14.2% |
| Current drawdown | -25.3% | -8.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 29.9% | 24.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.3% | -2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CCI or EQIX?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CCI is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 49 against EQIX's 33. 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 CCI or EQIX the better buy right now?
CCI carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 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 CCI over EQIX?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CCI leads Value by 23 points; CCI leads Quality by 18 points; CCI leads Momentum by 15 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CCI or EQIX?
Analyst price targets imply +18.4% upside for CCI and +18.1% for EQIX. 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, CCI or EQIX?
CCI is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CCI on the peer-relative Value factor, by 23 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, CCI or EQIX?
CCI 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, CCI or EQIX?
CCI on the Momentum factor, by 15 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, CCI or EQIX?
CCI is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CCI 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 CCI more profitable than EQIX?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 63.2% vs 51.6%; operating margin 47.7% vs 21.8%; ttm roe -51.7% vs 10.8%. CCI leads on two measures and EQIX on one measure, 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 CCI's lead over EQIX getting stronger or weaker?
CCI lead: Reversed — EQIX led by 3 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; CCI now leads by 16. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 8 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-24, when CCI moved ahead of EQIX.
What would change the CCI vs EQIX verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: EQIX closes the Value gap — currently 23 points behind, the largest single contributor to CCI's edge; EQIX's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; CCI'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 CCI and EQIX?
CCI: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. EQIX: 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 CCI is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On EQIX it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare CCI and EQIX 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.