CLDT vs CTRE Stock Comparison
Compare CLDT and CTRE across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between CLDT and CTRE?
CTRE leads the current stock comparison as CareTrust REIT, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Chatham Lodging Trust vs CareTrust REIT, Inc.
CTRE leads
CTRE leads by 9 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience, and the lead has widened from 1 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support CTRE, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Chatham Lodging Trust
CareTrust REIT, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CTRE over CLDT, 50 versus 41 as of Sep 11, 2026. CTRE's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while CLDT holds the stronger momentum profile. CTRE also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CTRE today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. CTRE lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 9 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Chatham Lodging Trust and CareTrust REIT, Inc. 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 CLDT and CTRE 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.
- Quality35 vs 65CTRE +30
- Risk Resilience52 vs 67CTRE +15
- Momentum41 vs 33CLDT +8
- Value41 vs 39Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor CTRE. CTRE’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; CLDT keeps a meaningful momentum 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 -1
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -8
New signals
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
CTRE's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CLDT and CTRE both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CTRE (CareTrust REIT, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
CLDT (Chatham Lodging Trust): the counter-case, on momentum, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 27.6% against 15.7%.
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
CTRECTRE on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CLDTCLDT on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
CLDTCLDT on the Momentum factor, by 8 points.
Lower downside
CTRECTRE on Risk Resilience, by 15 points.
Analyst upside
CTRECTRE 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 | CLDT | CTRE | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -0.5% | +15% | CTRE has more room |
| Target dispersion | +31.2% | +9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 7 | 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 CTRE. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | CTRE | 41 vs 50 |
| Fundamentals | CTREon balance | revenue growth 30.1% vs 13%; EPS growth 239% vs 5.6%; TTM ROE 1.6% vs 8.5%; gross margin 28.5% vs 78%; operating margin 10.2% vs 69.7% — CTRE takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 41 vs 39 |
| Technicals | CLDT | Price vs 50-day -1.9% vs -4.9%; vs 200-day 33.7% vs -0.5% |
| Risk Resilience | CTRE | Risk Resilience 52 vs 67 |
| Analyst expectations | CTRE | Target upside -0.5% vs 15% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CLDT and CTRE 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 9 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 CTRE.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10CTRE lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 9 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- CTRE +9
- 41 vs 50
- 7 sessions ago
- CTRE +9
- 43 vs 52
- 30 sessions ago
- CTRE +1
- 46 vs 47
- 90 sessions ago
- CTRE +12
- 46 vs 58
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Aug 31 when CTRE moved ahead of CLDT.
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
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (35.79%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (4.07%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
CTRE 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 -0.39%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -0.52%, 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.
- 1CLDT closes the Quality gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to CTRE's edge.
- 2CLDT's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3CTRE's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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
CTRE leads on balance| Metric | CLDT | CTRE |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 30.1% | 13% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 239% | 5.6% |
| Gross margin | 28.5% | 78% |
| Operating margin | 10.2% | 69.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 1.6% | 8.5% |
| Debt to equity | 0.6 | 0.27 |
Performance
CLDT leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | CLDT | CTRE |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.4% | -1.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 2.2% | -0.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 6% | 2.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 65.4% | -2.4% |
| Year to date | 90.2% | 7.4% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 76.9% | 12.6% |
Technicals
CLDT has the stronger structure| Metric | CLDT | CTRE |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 41.5 | 39.1 |
| ADX (14) | 14.1 | 14.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1.9% | -4.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 33.7% | -0.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 27.6% | 15.7% |
Risk
CTRE is the more resilient| Metric | CLDT | CTRE |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.58 | 0 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.96 | 0.51 |
| Sortino ratio | 4.27 | 0.75 |
| Max drawdown | -13.8% | -14.3% |
| Current drawdown | -6.1% | -10.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 31% | 25.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.3% | -2.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CLDT or CTRE?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CTRE is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 50 against CLDT's 41. The edge comes from quality and risk resilience. CLDT is not without a case — it holds the better momentum 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 CLDT or CTRE the better buy right now?
CTRE carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 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 CTRE over CLDT?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CTRE leads Quality by 30 points; CTRE leads Risk Resilience by 15 points; CLDT leads Momentum by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CLDT or CTRE?
Analyst price targets imply -0.5% upside for CLDT and +15% for CTRE, so the Street currently favors CTRE. 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, CLDT or CTRE?
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, CLDT or CTRE?
CLDT 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, CLDT or CTRE?
CLDT on the Momentum factor, by 8 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, CLDT or CTRE?
CTRE is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CTRE on Risk Resilience, by 15 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 CLDT more profitable than CTRE?
CTRE leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 28.5% vs 78%; operating margin 10.2% vs 69.7%; ttm roe 1.6% vs 8.5%.
Is CTRE's lead over CLDT getting stronger or weaker?
CTRE lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 9 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands 3 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-31, when CTRE moved ahead of CLDT.
What would change the CLDT vs CTRE verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CLDT closes the Quality gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to CTRE's edge; CLDT's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it; CTRE's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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 CLDT and CTRE?
CLDT: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. CTRE: 1 bullish / 1 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 CLDT is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On CTRE it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare CLDT and CTRE 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.