CDW vs DXC Stock Comparison
CDW currently leads DXC in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 65 vs 55. The clearest difference is quality.
What is the main difference between CDW and DXC?
CDW leads the current stock comparison as CDW Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
CDW Corporation vs DXC Technology Company
CDW leads
CDW leads by 10 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience, and the lead has widened from 5 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support CDW, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
CDW Corporation
DXC Technology Company
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CDW over DXC, 65 versus 55 as of Oct 21, 2026. CDW's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience. CDW also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CDW today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. CDW lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 10 points over 30 sessions.
Compare CDW Corporation and DXC Technology Company 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 CDW and DXC 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.
- Quality50 vs 20CDW +30
- Risk Resilience50 vs 43CDW +7
- Momentum85 vs 79CDW +6
- Value72 vs 75Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor CDW. CDW’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience.
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, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 7 active signals are unchanged.
CDW's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CDW and DXC both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CDW (CDW Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
DXC (DXC Technology Company): the counter-case, on technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 51.6% against 44.3%.
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
CDWCDW on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
DXCDXC on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
CDWCDW on the Momentum factor, by 6 points.
Lower downside
CDWCDW on Risk Resilience, by 7 points.
Analyst upside
CDWCDW 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 | CDW | DXC | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -6% | -18.1% | CDW has more room |
| Target dispersion | +32.3% | +43.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 5 | 3 | 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 CDW. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | CDW | 65 vs 55 |
| Fundamentals | CDWon balance | revenue growth 15.7% vs -4.2%; EPS growth 18.7% vs 193.8%; TTM ROE 42.6% vs 4.1%; gross margin 21.4% vs 13.7%; operating margin 7.1% vs 3.4% — CDW takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 72 vs 75 |
| Technicals | DXC | Price vs 50-day 10.6% vs 34.1%; vs 200-day 17.1% vs 23.3% |
| Risk Resilience | CDW | Risk Resilience 50 vs 43 |
| Analyst expectations | CDW | Target upside -6% vs -18.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CDW and DXC 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 10 points.
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (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 CDW.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20CDW lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 10 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- CDW +10
- 65 vs 55
- 7 sessions ago
- CDW +11
- 66 vs 55
- 30 sessions ago
- CDW +5
- 49 vs 44
- 90 sessions ago
- CDW +6
- 53 vs 47
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Oct 9 when CDW moved ahead of DXC.
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.
5 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
Only CDW
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (8.41%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
3 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only DXC
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.38%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.43%)
Both carry 4 more signals that do not separate them: Keltner Channel Breakout, RSI Overbought, EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish, MACD Bullish Crossover.
CDW 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 +2.12%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +5.26%, 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.
- 1DXC closes the Quality gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to CDW's edge.
- 2DXC's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3CDW's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 5 bullish and 1 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
CDW leads on balance| Metric | CDW | DXC |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 15.7% | -4.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 18.7% | 193.8% |
| Gross margin | 21.4% | 13.7% |
| Operating margin | 7.1% | 3.4% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 42.6% | 4.1% |
| Debt to equity | 2.44 | 1.37 |
Performance
DXC leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | CDW | DXC |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2% | 14.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 5.1% | 28.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 19.4% | 45.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 9.6% | 11.5% |
| Year to date | 13% | -0.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 2.6% | 11.1% |
Technicals
DXC has the stronger structure| Metric | CDW | DXC |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 80.9 | 86.4 |
| ADX (14) | 23.8 | 33.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | 10.6% | 34.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 17.1% | 23.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 44.3% | 51.6% |
Risk
CDW is the more resilient| Metric | CDW | DXC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.76 | 0.5 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.19 | 0.45 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.23 | 0.58 |
| Max drawdown | -37.7% | -46.7% |
| Current drawdown | -2.8% | -5.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 46.5% | 57.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.3% | -5.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CDW or DXC?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CDW is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 65 against DXC's 55. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. 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 CDW or DXC the better buy right now?
CDW 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 CDW over DXC?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CDW leads Quality by 30 points; CDW leads Risk Resilience by 7 points; CDW leads Momentum by 6 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CDW or DXC?
Analyst price targets imply -6% upside for CDW and -18.1% for DXC, so the Street currently favors CDW. 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, CDW or DXC?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. 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, CDW or DXC?
DXC 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, CDW or DXC?
CDW on the Momentum factor, by 6 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, CDW or DXC?
CDW is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CDW on Risk Resilience, by 7 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 CDW more profitable than DXC?
CDW leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 21.4% vs 13.7%; operating margin 7.1% vs 3.4%; ttm roe 42.6% vs 4.1%.
Is CDW's lead over DXC getting stronger or weaker?
CDW lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 10 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-09, when CDW moved ahead of DXC.
What would change the CDW vs DXC verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: DXC closes the Quality gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to CDW's edge; DXC's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; CDW's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 5 bullish and 1 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 CDW and DXC?
CDW: 5 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted. DXC: 3 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 CDW is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On DXC it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare CDW and DXC 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.