CHTR vs RUM Stock Comparison
CHTR currently leads RUM in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 55 vs 34. The clearest difference is value, while RUM has the stronger risk resilience profile.
What is the main difference between CHTR and RUM?
CHTR leads the current stock comparison as Charter Communications, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Charter Communications, Inc. vs Rumble Inc.
CHTR leads
CHTR leads by 21 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, and the lead has widened from 3 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors RUM on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support CHTR, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Charter Communications, Inc.
Rumble Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CHTR over RUM, 55 versus 34 as of Oct 21, 2026. CHTR's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while RUM holds the stronger risk resilience profile. CHTR also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors RUM. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CHTR today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. CHTR lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 21 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Charter Communications, Inc. and Rumble Inc. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price return from daily closes; distributions are not included.
Price return comparison
Growth of $10,000, price only
Split-adjusted closes only. Distributions are excluded, which understates the return of any fund or stock that pays them.
Compare CHTR and RUM 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.
- Value75 vs 34CHTR +41
- Quality56 vs 34CHTR +22
- Momentum46 vs 25CHTR +21
- Risk Resilience30 vs 49RUM +19
3 of 6 evidence groups favor CHTR. CHTR’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; RUM keeps a meaningful risk resilience 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: Momentum +3
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.
CHTR's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CHTR and RUM both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CHTR (Charter Communications, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
RUM (Rumble Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, technicals, analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 61.4% against 38.7%.
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
CHTRCHTR on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CHTRCHTR on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CHTRCHTR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 41 points.
Momentum
CHTRCHTR on the Momentum factor, by 21 points.
Lower downside
RUMRUM on Risk Resilience, by 19 points.
Analyst upside
RUMRUM on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors CHTR, analyst targets favor RUM. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | CHTR | RUM | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +57.4% | +329.6% | RUM has more room |
| Target dispersion | +165.3% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 10 | 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
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CHTR. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | CHTR | 55 vs 34 |
| Fundamentals | CHTR | EPS growth 16.1% vs -133.3%; TTM ROE 30.4% vs -29.3%; gross margin 56.6% vs 21.2%; operating margin 23.7% vs -97.8% |
| Valuation | CHTR | Value 75 vs 34 |
| Technicals | RUM | Price vs 50-day -18.3% vs -26.7%; vs 200-day -34.8% vs -13.7% |
| Risk Resilience | RUM | Risk Resilience 30 vs 49 |
| Analyst expectations | RUM | Target upside 57.4% vs 329.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CHTR and RUM 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 wide at 21 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. (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 CHTR.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20CHTR lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 21 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- CHTR +21
- 55 vs 34
- 7 sessions ago
- CHTR +19
- 53 vs 34
- 30 sessions ago
- CHTR +3
- 47 vs 44
- 90 sessions ago
- CHTR +11
- 57 vs 46
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 / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only CHTR
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (28.67%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only RUM
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (17.53%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode.
CHTR 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 down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -2.52%, AIQ +1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.17%, 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.
- 1RUM closes the Value gap — currently 41 points behind, the largest single contributor to CHTR's edge.
- 2RUM's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3CHTR's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 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
CHTR leads on balance| Metric | CHTR | RUM |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -0.5% | 58.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 16.1% | -133.3% |
| Gross margin | 56.6% | 21.2% |
| Operating margin | 23.7% | -97.8% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 30.4% | -29.3% |
| Debt to equity | 5.7 | 0.38 |
Performance
RUM leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | CHTR | RUM |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.9% | -13.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -6.2% | -34.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -14.9% | -5.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -54.5% | -9.5% |
| Year to date | -47.3% | -7.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -56.9% | -22.3% |
Technicals
RUM has the stronger structure| Metric | CHTR | RUM |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 48.6 | 21.1 |
| ADX (14) | 32.7 | 27.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -18.3% | -26.7% |
| Price vs 200-day | -34.8% | -13.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 38.7% | 61.4% |
Risk
RUM is the more resilient| Metric | CHTR | RUM |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.25 | 3.21 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.39 | 0.07 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.68 | 0.13 |
| Max drawdown | -59.5% | -44.4% |
| Current drawdown | -56.5% | -43% |
| Annualized volatility | 52.6% | 77.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.8% | -7.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CHTR or RUM?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CHTR is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 55 against RUM's 34. The edge comes from value and quality. RUM is not without a case — it holds the better risk resilience 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 CHTR or RUM the better buy right now?
CHTR carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor CHTR over RUM?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CHTR leads Value by 41 points; CHTR leads Quality by 22 points; CHTR leads Momentum by 21 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CHTR or RUM?
Analyst price targets imply +57.4% upside for CHTR and +329.6% for RUM, so the Street currently favors RUM. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors CHTR. 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, CHTR or RUM?
CHTR is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CHTR on the peer-relative Value factor, by 41 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, CHTR or RUM?
CHTR 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, CHTR or RUM?
CHTR on the Momentum factor, by 21 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, CHTR or RUM?
RUM is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. RUM on Risk Resilience, by 19 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 CHTR more profitable than RUM?
CHTR leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 56.6% vs 21.2%; operating margin 23.7% vs -97.8%; ttm roe 30.4% vs -29.3%.
Is CHTR's lead over RUM getting stronger or weaker?
CHTR lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 3 to 21 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 CHTR vs RUM verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: RUM closes the Value gap — currently 41 points behind, the largest single contributor to CHTR's edge; RUM's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; CHTR's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 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 CHTR and RUM?
CHTR: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. RUM: 2 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 CHTR is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On RUM it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare CHTR and RUM 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.