CGNX vs HSAI Stock Comparison
CGNX currently leads HSAI in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 48 vs 38. The clearest difference is quality.
What is the main difference between CGNX and HSAI?
CGNX leads the current stock comparison as Cognex Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Cognex Corporation vs Hesai Group
CGNX leads
CGNX leads by 10 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Value, but the lead has narrowed from 14 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors HSAI on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support CGNX, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Cognex Corporation
Hesai Group
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CGNX over HSAI, 48 versus 38 as of Oct 22, 2026. CGNX's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and value. CGNX also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors HSAI. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CGNX today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. CGNX lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 10 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Cognex Corporation and Hesai Group 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 CGNX and HSAI 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.
- Quality71 vs 53CGNX +18
- Value35 vs 24CGNX +11
- Momentum33 vs 30Even
- Risk Resilience51 vs 51Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor CGNX. CGNX’s edge is concentrated in quality and value.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +1
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +5
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
CGNX's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CGNX and HSAI both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CGNX (Cognex Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and value.
HSAI (Hesai Group): the counter-case, on analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 61.8% against 48.9%.
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
CGNXCGNX on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
HSAIHSAI on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CGNXCGNX on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
CGNXCGNX carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
HSAIHSAI on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors CGNX, analyst targets favor HSAI. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | CGNX | HSAI | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +27.1% | +118% | HSAI has more room |
| Target dispersion | +40.7% | +15.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CGNX. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | CGNX | 48 vs 38 |
| Fundamentals | CGNXon balance | revenue growth 8.5% vs 126.5%; EPS growth 38.7% vs 275%; TTM ROE 11.5% vs 5.8%; gross margin 68.9% vs 40.4%; operating margin 21.9% vs 3% — CGNX takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | CGNX | Value 35 vs 24 |
| Technicals | CGNX | Price vs 50-day -4.5% vs -21%; vs 200-day -0.7% vs -31.4% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 51 vs 51 |
| Analyst expectations | HSAI | Target upside 27.1% vs 118% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CGNX and HSAI 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 moderate at 10 points.
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 CGNX.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20CGNX lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 10 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- CGNX +10
- 48 vs 38
- 7 sessions ago
- CGNX +11
- 48 vs 37
- 30 sessions ago
- CGNX +14
- 51 vs 37
- 90 sessions ago
- CGNX +7
- 56 vs 49
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 / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only CGNX
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (6.34%)
0 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral
Only HSAI
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (22.16%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode, MACD Bearish Crossover.
CGNX 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 and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +2.25%, AIQ +1 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -5.72%, AIQ +1 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.
- 1HSAI closes the Quality gap — currently 18 points behind, the largest single contributor to CGNX's edge.
- 2HSAI's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3CGNX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 10-point move would eliminate CGNX'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
CGNX leads on balance| Metric | CGNX | HSAI |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 8.5% | 126.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 38.7% | 275% |
| Gross margin | 68.9% | 40.4% |
| Operating margin | 21.9% | 3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 11.5% | 5.8% |
| Debt to equity | 0.04 | 0.09 |
Performance
CGNX leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | CGNX | HSAI |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -5.4% | -3.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -3.7% | -18.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -9.2% | -6% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 5.7% | -34.6% |
| Year to date | 57.8% | -37.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 22.6% | -38.5% |
Technicals
CGNX has the stronger structure| Metric | CGNX | HSAI |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 42.6 | 37.2 |
| ADX (14) | 15.1 | 28.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -4.5% | -21% |
| Price vs 200-day | -0.7% | -31.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 48.9% | 61.8% |
Risk
Split| Metric | CGNX | HSAI |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.82 | 2.93 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.56 | -0.38 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.07 | -0.64 |
| Max drawdown | -28% | -56.9% |
| Current drawdown | -21.6% | -51.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 58.6% | 70.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.5% | -7.2% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CGNX or HSAI?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CGNX is the stronger of the two as of Oct 22, 2026, scoring 48 against HSAI's 38. The edge comes from quality and value. 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 CGNX or HSAI the better buy right now?
CGNX carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 22, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor CGNX over HSAI?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CGNX leads Quality by 18 points; CGNX leads Value by 11 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CGNX or HSAI?
Analyst price targets imply +27.1% upside for CGNX and +118% for HSAI, so the Street currently favors HSAI. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors CGNX. 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, CGNX or HSAI?
CGNX is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CGNX on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 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, CGNX or HSAI?
HSAI 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, CGNX or HSAI?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, CGNX or HSAI?
CGNX is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CGNX 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 CGNX more profitable than HSAI?
CGNX leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 68.9% vs 40.4%; operating margin 21.9% vs 3%; ttm roe 11.5% vs 5.8%.
Is CGNX's lead over HSAI getting stronger or weaker?
CGNX lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 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 not changed hands in that window.
What would change the CGNX vs HSAI verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: HSAI closes the Quality gap — currently 18 points behind, the largest single contributor to CGNX's edge; HSAI's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; CGNX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 10-point move would eliminate CGNX's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about CGNX and HSAI?
CGNX: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. HSAI: 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 CGNX is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On HSAI it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare CGNX and HSAI 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.