CHRD vs CNX Stock Comparison
CNX currently leads CHRD in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 62 vs 61. The clearest difference is quality, while CHRD has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between CHRD and CNX?
CNX leads the current stock comparison as CNX Resources Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Chord Energy Corporation vs CNX Resources Corporation
CNX leads
CNX leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 4 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors CHRD on target upside.
Fragile: 1 of 6 evidence groups support CNX, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Chord Energy Corporation
CNX Resources Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CNX over CHRD, 62 versus 61 as of Oct 31, 2026. CNX's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while CHRD holds the stronger value profile. CNX also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors CHRD. 1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CNX today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. CNX lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 1 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Chord Energy Corporation and CNX Resources Corporation 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 CHRD and CNX 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 66CNX +16
- Value63 vs 52CHRD +11
- Risk Resilience50 vs 47Even
- Momentum80 vs 80Even
1 of 6 evidence groups favor CNX. CNX’s edge is concentrated in quality; CHRD keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum -2
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience -1
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
CNX's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CHRD and CNX both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CNX (CNX Resources Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
CHRD (Chord Energy Corporation): the counter-case, on value, valuation, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 32.7% against 26.2%.
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
CNXCNX on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CHRDCHRD on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CHRDCHRD on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
CNXCNX carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
CHRDCHRD on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors CNX, analyst targets favor CHRD. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | CHRD | CNX | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +11% | -2.4% | CHRD has more room |
| Target dispersion | +29.8% | +21.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 3 | 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
1 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CNX. 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 | 61 vs 62 |
| Fundamentals | CNXon balance | revenue growth 30.4% vs -21%; EPS growth 3.9% vs -46.7%; TTM ROE 10.4% vs 21.2%; gross margin 27.4% vs 49.9%; operating margin 18.9% vs 42.2% — CNX takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | CHRD | Value 63 vs 52 |
| Technicals | CHRD | Price vs 50-day 7.8% vs 7.1%; vs 200-day 17.9% vs 4.4% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 50 vs 47 |
| Analyst expectations | CHRD | Target upside 11% vs -2.4% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CHRD and CNX 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 1 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 1 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 CNX.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28CNX lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 1 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- CNX +1
- 61 vs 62
- 7 sessions ago
- Level
- 62 vs 62
- 30 sessions ago
- CNX +4
- 49 vs 53
- 90 sessions ago
- Level
- 59 vs 59
The lead changed hands 9 times in this window, most recently on Oct 12 when CHRD moved ahead of CNX.
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.
4 bullish / 0 bearish
Only CHRD
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (11.50%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only CNX
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (3.97%)
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
CNX 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 is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +2.19%, AIQ -1 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.9%, 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.
- 1CHRD closes the Quality gap — currently 16 points behind, the largest single contributor to CNX's edge.
- 2CHRD's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed.
- 3CNX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 1-point move would eliminate CNX'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
CNX leads on balance| Metric | CHRD | CNX |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 30.4% | -21% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 3.9% | -46.7% |
| Gross margin | 27.4% | 49.9% |
| Operating margin | 18.9% | 42.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 10.4% | 21.2% |
| Debt to equity | 0.18 | 0.49 |
Performance
CHRD leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | CHRD | CNX |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.1% | 8.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 14.9% | 19.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 11.4% | 9.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 5.4% | -3.2% |
| Year to date | 66.2% | 3.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 66.6% | 16.4% |
Technicals
CHRD has the stronger structure| Metric | CHRD | CNX |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 68.4 | 75.6 |
| ADX (14) | 17.2 | 25.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | 7.8% | 7.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 17.9% | 4.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 32.7% | 26.2% |
Risk
Split| Metric | CHRD | CNX |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.77 | -0.13 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.45 | 0.62 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.22 | 1.02 |
| Max drawdown | -25.4% | -26.9% |
| Current drawdown | -2.6% | -10.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 39.5% | 28.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.8% | -2.9% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CHRD or CNX?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CNX is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 62 against CHRD's 61. The edge comes from quality. CHRD is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 CHRD or CNX the better buy right now?
CNX carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 1 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor CNX over CHRD?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CNX leads Quality by 16 points; CHRD leads Value by 11 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CHRD or CNX?
Analyst price targets imply +11% upside for CHRD and -2.4% for CNX, so the Street currently favors CHRD. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors CNX. 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, CHRD or CNX?
CHRD is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CHRD 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, CHRD or CNX?
CHRD 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, CHRD or CNX?
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, CHRD or CNX?
CNX is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CNX 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 CHRD more profitable than CNX?
CNX leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 27.4% vs 49.9%; operating margin 18.9% vs 42.2%; ttm roe 10.4% vs 21.2%.
Is CNX's lead over CHRD getting stronger or weaker?
CNX lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 1 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 9 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-12, when CHRD moved ahead of CNX.
What would change the CHRD vs CNX verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CHRD closes the Quality gap — currently 16 points behind, the largest single contributor to CNX's edge; CHRD's existing bullish trend signals translate into factor-score gains — the rules are already firing, but the scores have not yet followed; CNX's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 1-point move would eliminate CNX's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about CHRD and CNX?
CHRD: 4 bullish / 0 bearish. CNX: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 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 CHRD is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On CNX it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare CHRD and CNX 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.