CHRD vs COP Stock Comparison
Compare CHRD and COP across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between CHRD and COP?
CHRD leads the current stock comparison as Chord Energy Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Chord Energy Corporation vs ConocoPhillips
CHRD leads
CHRD leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Value, having only recently taken the lead back from COP.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support CHRD, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Chord Energy Corporation
ConocoPhillips
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CHRD over COP, 58 versus 55 as of Sep 11, 2026. CHRD's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value, while COP holds the stronger quality profile. CHRD also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CHRD today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. CHRD lead: Reversed — COP led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; CHRD now leads by 3.
Compare Chord Energy Corporation and ConocoPhillips 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 CHRD and COP 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.
- Value63 vs 40CHRD +23
- Quality50 vs 62COP +12
- Risk Resilience51 vs 53Even
- Momentum66 vs 66Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor CHRD. CHRD’s edge is concentrated in value; COP keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Momentum +2
New signals
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -6
No new signals fired.
CHRD's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CHRD and COP both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CHRD (Chord Energy Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value.
COP (ConocoPhillips): the counter-case, on quality, fundamentals.
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
CHRDCHRD on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
COPCOP on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CHRDCHRD on the peer-relative Value factor, by 23 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
COPCOP carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
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 | CHRD | COP | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +9.7% | +9.1% | Level |
| Target dispersion | +29.4% | +41.4% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 7 | 11 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CHRD. 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 | 58 vs 55 |
| Fundamentals | COPon balance | revenue growth 30.4% vs 12.7%; EPS growth 3.9% vs 81.5%; TTM ROE 10.4% vs 14.3%; gross margin 27.4% vs 50.8%; operating margin 18.9% vs 22.7% — COP takes 4 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | CHRD | Value 63 vs 40 |
| Technicals | CHRD | Price vs 50-day 12.1% vs 12.5%; vs 200-day 24.6% vs 20.8% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 51 vs 53 |
| Analyst expectations | Even | Target upside 9.7% vs 9.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CHRD and COP 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 3 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
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 CHRD.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10CHRD lead: Reversed — COP led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; CHRD now leads by 3.
- Today
- CHRD +3
- 58 vs 55
- 7 sessions ago
- CHRD +1
- 58 vs 57
- 30 sessions ago
- COP +2
- 59 vs 61
- 90 sessions ago
- COP +3
- 48 vs 51
The lead changed hands 9 times in this window, most recently on Jul 29 when CHRD moved ahead of COP.
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 / 0 bearish
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (11.28%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (0.0%)
4 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (7.58%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (0.0%)
COP 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 +0.13%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.23%, AIQ -2 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.
- 1COP closes the Value gap — currently 23 points behind, the largest single contributor to CHRD's edge.
- 2COP generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3CHRD's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 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
COP leads on balance| Metric | CHRD | COP |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 30.4% | 12.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 3.9% | 81.5% |
| Gross margin | 27.4% | 50.8% |
| Operating margin | 18.9% | 22.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 10.4% | 14.3% |
| Debt to equity | 0.18 | 0.36 |
Performance
CHRD leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | CHRD | COP |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.5% | -0.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 10.4% | 7.7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 9.8% | 14.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 21.7% | 17.1% |
| Year to date | 61.4% | 45.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 46.8% | 48.2% |
Technicals
CHRD has the stronger structure| Metric | CHRD | COP |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 55.3 | 55.7 |
| ADX (14) | 19.9 | 27.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | 12.1% | 12.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | 24.6% | 20.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 30.9% | 22.8% |
Risk
Split| Metric | CHRD | COP |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.57 | -0.53 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.09 | 1.35 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.71 | 2.23 |
| Max drawdown | -25.4% | -22.9% |
| Current drawdown | 0% | -0.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 39.4% | 30.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.8% | -3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CHRD or COP?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CHRD is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 58 against COP's 55. The edge comes from value. COP is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 COP the better buy right now?
CHRD carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor CHRD over COP?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CHRD leads Value by 23 points; COP leads Quality by 12 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CHRD or COP?
Analyst price targets imply +9.7% upside for CHRD and +9.1% for COP. 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, CHRD or COP?
CHRD is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CHRD on the peer-relative Value factor, by 23 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 COP?
COP 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 COP?
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 COP?
COP is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. COP 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 COP?
COP leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 27.4% vs 50.8%; operating margin 18.9% vs 22.7%; ttm roe 10.4% vs 14.3%.
Is CHRD's lead over COP getting stronger or weaker?
CHRD lead: Reversed — COP led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; CHRD now leads by 3. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 9 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-29, when CHRD moved ahead of COP.
What would change the CHRD vs COP verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: COP closes the Value gap — currently 23 points behind, the largest single contributor to CHRD's edge; COP generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover; CHRD's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict; 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 CHRD and COP?
CHRD: 5 bullish / 0 bearish. COP: 4 bullish / 1 bearish, 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 COP it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare CHRD and COP 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.