CCI vs ESRT Stock Comparison
Compare CCI and ESRT across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between CCI and ESRT?
CCI leads the current stock comparison as Crown Castle Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Crown Castle Inc. vs Empire State Realty Trust, Inc.
CCI leads
CCI leads by 12 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 8 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors ESRT on target upside.
Competitive: 3 of 6 evidence groups support CCI, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Crown Castle Inc.
Empire State Realty Trust, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CCI over ESRT, 49 versus 37 as of Sep 11, 2026. CCI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while ESRT holds the stronger value profile. CCI also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors ESRT. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CCI today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. CCI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 12 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Crown Castle Inc. and Empire State Realty Trust, 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 ESRT 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.
- Quality58 vs 1CCI +57
- Value48 vs 75ESRT +27
- Momentum35 vs 25CCI +10
- Risk Resilience55 vs 53Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor CCI. CCI’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; ESRT keeps a meaningful value edge.
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: Risk Resilience +1
No new signals fired.
CCI's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CCI and ESRT both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CCI (Crown Castle Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
ESRT (Empire State Realty Trust, Inc.): the counter-case, on value, valuation, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 30.6% against 20.4%.
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
CCICCI on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CCICCI on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
ESRTESRT on the peer-relative Value factor, by 27 points.
Momentum
CCICCI on the Momentum factor, by 10 points.
Lower downside
CCICCI carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
ESRTESRT on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors CCI, analyst targets favor ESRT. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | CCI | ESRT | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +18.4% | +28.5% | ESRT has more room |
| Target dispersion | +12.3% | +18.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 2 | 2 | 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 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 37 |
| Fundamentals | CCI | EPS growth 108.8% vs -21.8%; gross margin 63.2% vs -22.9%; operating margin 47.7% vs 16.8% |
| Valuation | ESRT | Value 48 vs 75 |
| Technicals | CCI | Price vs 50-day -0.7% vs -15.1%; vs 200-day -12.6% vs -25.5% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 55 vs 53 |
| Analyst expectations | ESRT | Target upside 18.4% vs 28.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CCI and ESRT 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 12 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 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 CCI.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10CCI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 12 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- CCI +12
- 49 vs 37
- 7 sessions ago
- CCI +12
- 52 vs 40
- 30 sessions ago
- CCI +8
- 46 vs 38
- 90 sessions ago
- ESRT +3
- 42 vs 45
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Jul 27 when ESRT moved ahead of CCI.
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 / 5 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (12.92%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, 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).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.94%, 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.
- 1ESRT closes the Quality gap — currently 57 points behind, the largest single contributor to CCI's edge.
- 2ESRT's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend 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 | ESRT |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -0.2% | 3.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 108.8% | -21.8% |
| Gross margin | 63.2% | -22.9% |
| Operating margin | 47.7% | 16.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -51.7% | 0.7% |
| Debt to equity | -7.16 | 2.14 |
Performance
CCI leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | CCI | ESRT |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2% | -3.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.1% | -10.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -19.2% | -24.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -15.6% | -20.3% |
| Year to date | -16.9% | -32.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -21.3% | -45.5% |
Technicals
CCI has the stronger structure| Metric | CCI | ESRT |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 42.2 | 22.2 |
| ADX (14) | 17.9 | 30.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | -0.7% | -15.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -12.6% | -25.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 20.4% | 30.6% |
Risk
Split| Metric | CCI | ESRT |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.09 | 0.33 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.81 | -1.62 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.1 | -2.12 |
| Max drawdown | -25.6% | -46.8% |
| Current drawdown | -25.3% | -46.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 29.9% | 34.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.3% | -3.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CCI or ESRT?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CCI is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 49 against ESRT's 37. The edge comes from quality and momentum. ESRT 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 CCI or ESRT the better buy right now?
CCI carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 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 CCI over ESRT?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CCI leads Quality by 57 points; ESRT leads Value by 27 points; CCI leads Momentum by 10 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CCI or ESRT?
Analyst price targets imply +18.4% upside for CCI and +28.5% for ESRT, so the Street currently favors ESRT. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors CCI. 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, CCI or ESRT?
ESRT is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. ESRT on the peer-relative Value factor, by 27 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 ESRT?
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 ESRT?
CCI on the Momentum factor, by 10 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 ESRT?
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 ESRT?
CCI leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 63.2% vs -22.9%; operating margin 47.7% vs 16.8%; ttm roe -51.7% vs 0.7%.
Is CCI's lead over ESRT getting stronger or weaker?
CCI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 8 to 12 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-27, when ESRT moved ahead of CCI.
What would change the CCI vs ESRT verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ESRT closes the Quality gap — currently 57 points behind, the largest single contributor to CCI's edge; ESRT's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend 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 ESRT?
CCI: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. ESRT: 1 bullish / 5 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 CCI is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On ESRT it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare CCI and ESRT 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.