CD vs CHTR Stock Comparison
Compare CD and CHTR across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between CD and CHTR?
CHTR leads the current stock comparison as Charter Communications, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Chaince Digital Holdings Inc. vs Charter Communications, Inc.
CHTR leads
CHTR leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Value, but the lead has narrowed from 5 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 1 of 5 evidence groups support CHTR, and its lead is narrowing.
Chaince Digital Holdings Inc.
Charter Communications, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CHTR over CD, 58 versus 56 as of Sep 6, 2026. CHTR's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value, while CD holds the stronger risk resilience profile. CHTR also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 1 of 5 covered evidence groups favor CHTR today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. CHTR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 2 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Chaince Digital Holdings Inc. and Charter Communications, 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 CD and CHTR 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%55 vs 75CHTR +20
- Risk Resilience15%40 vs 24CD +16
- Momentum25%64 vs 59CD +5
- Quality30%58 vs 56Even
1 of 5 evidence groups favor CHTR. CHTR’s edge is concentrated in value; CD keeps a meaningful risk resilience 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.
CHTR's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CD and CHTR both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CHTR (Charter Communications, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value.
CD (Chaince Digital Holdings Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, momentum, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 178.1% against 60.5%.
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
CHTRCHTR on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
CHTRCHTR on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CHTRCHTR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 20 points.
Momentum
CDCD on the Momentum factor, by 5 points.
Lower downside
CDCD on Risk Resilience, by 16 points.
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 | CD | CHTR | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | — | +16.3% | Level |
| Target dispersion | — | +157.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | — | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | — | 8 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
1 of 5 covered evidence groups favor CHTR. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 56 vs 58 |
| Fundamentals | Even | revenue growth 0% vs -0.5%; TTM ROE -13% vs 30.4%; gross margin 63.6% vs 56.6%; operating margin -201.9% vs 23.7% |
| Valuation | CHTR | Value 55 vs 75 |
| Technicals | CD | Price vs 50-day 19.3% vs 6.1%; vs 200-day -22.7% vs -16.6% |
| Risk Resilience | CD | Risk Resilience 40 vs 24 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CD and CHTR 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 narrow at 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 1 of 5 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 CHTR.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 24 – Sep 5CHTR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 2 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- CHTR +2
- 56 vs 58
- 7 sessions ago
- CHTR +4
- 51 vs 55
- 30 sessions ago
- CHTR +5
- 57 vs 62
- 90 sessions ago
- CHTR +5
- 49 vs 54
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Jun 5 when CHTR moved ahead of CD.
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 / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (53.94%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Beta Spike Warning — bearish, risk, long horizon
0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (27.15%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (5.00%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
CD is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
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 +11.81%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.4%, 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.
- 1CD closes the Value gap — currently 20 points behind, the largest single contributor to CHTR's edge.
- 2CD's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3CHTR starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 2-point move would eliminate CHTR's advantage entirely.
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 | CD | CHTR |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 0% | -0.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 0% | 16.1% |
| Gross margin | 63.6% | 56.6% |
| Operating margin | -201.9% | 23.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -13% | 30.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0.02 | 5.7 |
Performance
CD leads 4 of 5 windows| Metric | CD | CHTR |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 24.8% | -1.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 53.6% | -0.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -23.6% | 15% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -27.6% | -34.6% |
| Year to date | -18.1% | -27.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | — | -41.8% |
Technicals
CD has the stronger structure| Metric | CD | CHTR |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 60.8 | 56.5 |
| ADX (14) | 18.2 | 16 |
| Price vs 50-day | 19.3% | 6.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -22.7% | -16.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 178.1% | 60.5% |
Risk
CD is the more resilient| Metric | CD | CHTR |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.57 | 0.29 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.05 | -0.87 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.09 | -1.02 |
| Max drawdown | -75.7% | -56.4% |
| Current drawdown | -62.7% | -46.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 147.5% | 50.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -12.8% | -4.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CD or CHTR?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CHTR is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 58 against CD's 56. The edge comes from value. CD 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 CD or CHTR the better buy right now?
CHTR carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 6, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 1 of 5 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor CHTR over CD?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. CHTR leads Value by 20 points; CD leads Risk Resilience by 16 points; CD leads Momentum by 5 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CD or CHTR?
Analyst price targets imply not covered upside for CD and +16.3% for CHTR. 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, CD or CHTR?
CHTR is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CHTR 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, CD or CHTR?
CHTR 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, CD or CHTR?
CD on the Momentum factor, by 5 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, CD or CHTR?
CD is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CD on Risk Resilience, by 16 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is CD more profitable than CHTR?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 63.6% vs 56.6%; operating margin -201.9% vs 23.7%; ttm roe -13% vs 30.4%. CD leads on one measure and CHTR 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 CHTR's lead over CD getting stronger or weaker?
CHTR lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 2 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-24 and 2026-09-05. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-06-05, when CHTR moved ahead of CD.
What would change the CD vs CHTR verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CD closes the Value gap — currently 20 points behind, the largest single contributor to CHTR's edge; CD's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; CHTR starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 2-point move would eliminate CHTR's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about CD and CHTR?
CD: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. CHTR: 0 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 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 CD is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On CHTR it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare CD and CHTR 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.