CCL vs DKNG Stock Comparison
Compare CCL and DKNG across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between CCL and DKNG?
CCL leads the current stock comparison as Carnival Corporation & plc, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Carnival Corporation & plc vs DraftKings Inc.
CCL leads
CCL leads by 14 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support CCL, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Carnival Corporation & plc
DraftKings Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CCL over DKNG, 41 versus 27 as of Sep 6, 2026. CCL's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while DKNG holds the stronger momentum profile. CCL also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CCL today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. CCL lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 14 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Carnival Corporation & plc and DraftKings 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 CCL and DKNG 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.
- Value30%63 vs 29CCL +34
- Quality30%40 vs 18CCL +22
- Momentum25%24 vs 36DKNG +12
- Risk Resilience15%26 vs 27Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor CCL. CCL’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; DKNG keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-05, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-04.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
CCL's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CCL and DKNG both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CCL (Carnival Corporation & plc): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
DKNG (DraftKings Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 50.5% against 32.9%.
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
CCLCCL on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
CCLCCL on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CCLCCL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 34 points.
Momentum
DKNGDKNG on the Momentum factor, by 12 points.
Lower downside
CCLCCL carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
CCLCCL 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 | CCL | DKNG | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +52.3% | +39.4% | CCL has more room |
| Target dispersion | +33.5% | +65.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 10 | 16 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CCL. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | CCL | 41 vs 27 |
| Fundamentals | CCLon balance | revenue growth 8.1% vs -12.3%; EPS growth 105.3% vs -4.2%; TTM ROE 24.4% vs -26.3%; gross margin 34.4% vs 40.5%; operating margin 16.3% vs -2.9% — CCL takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | CCL | Value 63 vs 29 |
| Technicals | DKNG | Price vs 50-day -12.4% vs -3.1%; vs 200-day -15.4% vs -10.2% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 26 vs 27 |
| Analyst expectations | CCL | Target upside 52.3% vs 39.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CCL and DKNG 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)
- 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 CCL.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 24 – Sep 5CCL lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 14 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- CCL +14
- 41 vs 27
- 7 sessions ago
- CCL +13
- 40 vs 27
- 30 sessions ago
- CCL +15
- 50 vs 35
- 90 sessions ago
- CCL +17
- 45 vs 28
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
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 / 6 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (3.57%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
0 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (7.93%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
CCL 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 +0.13%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.74%, 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.
- 1DKNG closes the Value gap — currently 34 points behind, the largest single contributor to CCL's edge.
- 2DKNG's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3CCL's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 6 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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
CCL leads on balance| Metric | CCL | DKNG |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 8.1% | -12.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 105.3% | -4.2% |
| Gross margin | 34.4% | 40.5% |
| Operating margin | 16.3% | -2.9% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 24.4% | -26.3% |
| Debt to equity | 2.02 | 3.36 |
Performance
DKNG leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | CCL | DKNG |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -5% | -4.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -18.9% | -0.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -14.2% | -3.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -8.8% | -4.5% |
| Year to date | -22.2% | -30.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -25% | -49.6% |
Technicals
DKNG has the stronger structure| Metric | CCL | DKNG |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 19.3 | 43.4 |
| ADX (14) | 26 | 9.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | -12.4% | -3.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -15.4% | -10.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 32.9% | 50.5% |
Risk
Split| Metric | CCL | DKNG |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2 | 0.67 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.48 | -1.11 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.85 | -1.52 |
| Max drawdown | -31.7% | -56.3% |
| Current drawdown | -30.8% | -49.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 47.8% | 52.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.3% | -5.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CCL or DKNG?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CCL is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 41 against DKNG's 27. The edge comes from value and quality. DKNG is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 CCL or DKNG the better buy right now?
CCL carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 6, 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 CCL over DKNG?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. CCL leads Value by 34 points; CCL leads Quality by 22 points; DKNG leads Momentum by 12 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CCL or DKNG?
Analyst price targets imply +52.3% upside for CCL and +39.4% for DKNG, so the Street currently favors CCL. 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, CCL or DKNG?
CCL is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CCL on the peer-relative Value factor, by 34 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, CCL or DKNG?
CCL 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, CCL or DKNG?
DKNG on the Momentum factor, by 12 points. Momentum carries 25% of 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, CCL or DKNG?
CCL is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CCL carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is CCL more profitable than DKNG?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 34.4% vs 40.5%; operating margin 16.3% vs -2.9%; ttm roe 24.4% vs -26.3%. CCL leads on two measures and DKNG 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 CCL's lead over DKNG getting stronger or weaker?
CCL lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 14 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-24 and 2026-09-05. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the CCL vs DKNG verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: DKNG closes the Value gap — currently 34 points behind, the largest single contributor to CCL's edge; DKNG's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; CCL's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 6 bearish rules at once; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about CCL and DKNG?
CCL: 1 bullish / 6 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. DKNG: 0 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral. 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 CCL is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On DKNG it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare CCL and DKNG with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.