CDE vs EXK Stock Comparison
CDE currently leads EXK in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 47 vs 36. The clearest difference is risk resilience, while EXK has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between CDE and EXK?
CDE leads the current stock comparison as Coeur Mining, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Coeur Mining, Inc. vs Endeavour Silver Corp.
CDE leads
CDE leads by 11 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Value. Wall Street currently favors EXK on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support CDE, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Coeur Mining, Inc.
Endeavour Silver Corp.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CDE over EXK, 47 versus 36 as of Oct 21, 2026. CDE's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and value, while EXK holds the stronger momentum profile. CDE also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors EXK. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CDE today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. CDE lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 11 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Coeur Mining, Inc. and Endeavour Silver Corp. 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 CDE and EXK 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.
- Risk Resilience53 vs 32CDE +21
- Value45 vs 27CDE +18
- Quality64 vs 48CDE +16
- Momentum24 vs 35EXK +11
4 of 6 evidence groups favor CDE. CDE’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and value; EXK keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience +1
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 8 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +2, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
New signals
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
CDE's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CDE and EXK both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CDE (Coeur Mining, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and value.
EXK (Endeavour Silver Corp.): the counter-case, on momentum, technicals, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 58% against 47.3%.
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
CDECDE on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
EXKEXK on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CDECDE on the peer-relative Value factor, by 18 points.
Momentum
EXKEXK on the Momentum factor, by 11 points.
Lower downside
CDECDE on Risk Resilience, by 21 points.
Analyst upside
EXKEXK on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors CDE, analyst targets favor EXK. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | CDE | EXK | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +56% | +104.6% | EXK has more room |
| Target dispersion | +40.3% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 1 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CDE. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | CDE | 47 vs 36 |
| Fundamentals | CDEon balance | revenue growth 26.8% vs 2.1%; EPS growth -69.2% vs -4.3%; TTM ROE 12.5% vs 10.5%; gross margin 50.4% vs 28.3%; operating margin 35% vs 25.7% — CDE takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | CDE | Value 45 vs 27 |
| Technicals | EXK | Price vs 50-day -20.3% vs -15%; vs 200-day -21% vs -16.9% |
| Risk Resilience | CDE | Risk Resilience 53 vs 32 |
| Analyst expectations | EXK | Target upside 56% vs 104.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CDE and EXK 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 moderate at 11 points.
- 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 CDE.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20CDE lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 11 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- CDE +11
- 47 vs 36
- 7 sessions ago
- CDE +12
- 46 vs 34
- 30 sessions ago
- CDE +13
- 46 vs 33
- 90 sessions ago
- CDE +14
- 61 vs 47
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 / 5 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only CDE
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- Beta Spike Warning — bearish, risk, long horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only EXK
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 4 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, Death Cross Active, ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode, Downtrend Structure Active.
CDE 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%, AIQ +1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +1.34%, 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.
- 1EXK closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 21 points behind, the largest single contributor to CDE's edge.
- 2EXK's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3CDE's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 5 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
CDE leads on balance| Metric | CDE | EXK |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 26.8% | 2.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -69.2% | -4.3% |
| Gross margin | 50.4% | 28.3% |
| Operating margin | 35% | 25.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 12.5% | 10.5% |
| Debt to equity | 0.07 | 0.35 |
Performance
EXK leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | CDE | EXK |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -6.9% | -0.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -26.2% | -22% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -4.5% | -1.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -18% | -12.6% |
| Year to date | -15.1% | -12.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -32.6% | -15.6% |
Technicals
EXK has the stronger structure| Metric | CDE | EXK |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 26 | 41.4 |
| ADX (14) | 26.5 | 22.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | -20.3% | -15% |
| Price vs 200-day | -21% | -16.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 47.3% | 58% |
Risk
CDE is the more resilient| Metric | CDE | EXK |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.97 | 3.06 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.14 | 0.2 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.21 | 0.31 |
| Max drawdown | -47.9% | -47.5% |
| Current drawdown | -44.3% | -41.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 73.2% | 76.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -7.5% | -7.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CDE or EXK?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CDE is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 47 against EXK's 36. The edge comes from risk resilience and value. EXK 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 CDE or EXK the better buy right now?
CDE carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 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 CDE over EXK?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CDE leads Risk Resilience by 21 points; CDE leads Value by 18 points; CDE leads Quality by 16 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CDE or EXK?
Analyst price targets imply +56% upside for CDE and +104.6% for EXK, so the Street currently favors EXK. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors CDE. 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, CDE or EXK?
CDE is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CDE on the peer-relative Value factor, by 18 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, CDE or EXK?
EXK 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, CDE or EXK?
EXK on the Momentum factor, by 11 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, CDE or EXK?
CDE is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CDE on Risk Resilience, by 21 points. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is CDE more profitable than EXK?
CDE leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 50.4% vs 28.3%; operating margin 35% vs 25.7%; ttm roe 12.5% vs 10.5%.
Is CDE's lead over EXK getting stronger or weaker?
CDE lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 11 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the CDE vs EXK verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: EXK closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 21 points behind, the largest single contributor to CDE's edge; EXK's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; CDE's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 5 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 CDE and EXK?
CDE: 1 bullish / 5 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. EXK: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 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 CDE is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On EXK it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare CDE and EXK 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.