CLNE vs CWEN Stock Comparison
Compare CLNE and CWEN across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between CLNE and CWEN?
CLNE leads the current stock comparison as Clean Energy Fuels Corp., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Clean Energy Fuels Corp. vs Clearway Energy, Inc.
CLNE leads
CLNE leads by 10 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 1 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors CWEN on target upside.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support CLNE, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Clean Energy Fuels Corp.
Clearway Energy, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CLNE over CWEN, 43 versus 33 as of Sep 11, 2026. CLNE's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum, while CWEN holds the stronger risk resilience profile. CLNE also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors CWEN. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CLNE today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. CLNE lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 10 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Clean Energy Fuels Corp. and Clearway Energy, 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 CLNE and CWEN 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 28CLNE +35
- Risk Resilience37 vs 53CWEN +16
- Momentum40 vs 33CLNE +7
- Quality30 vs 29Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor CLNE. CLNE’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum; CWEN keeps a meaningful risk resilience 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 -7
New signals
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (2.6%)
Largest factor move: Momentum +4
No new signals fired.
CLNE's lead narrowed by 3 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CLNE and CWEN both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CLNE (Clean Energy Fuels Corp.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and momentum.
CWEN (Clearway Energy, Inc.): the counter-case, on risk resilience, fundamentals, technicals.
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
CLNECLNE on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CWENCWEN on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CLNECLNE on the peer-relative Value factor, by 35 points.
Momentum
CLNECLNE on the Momentum factor, by 7 points.
Lower downside
CWENCWEN on Risk Resilience, by 16 points.
Analyst upside
CWENCWEN on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors CLNE, analyst targets favor CWEN. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | CLNE | CWEN | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +46% | +51.7% | CWEN has more room |
| Target dispersion | +35.7% | +46.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 3 | 6 | 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
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CLNE. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | CLNE | 43 vs 33 |
| Fundamentals | CWEN | revenue growth -9% vs 35.9%; EPS growth -23.9% vs 173%; TTM ROE -16.7% vs 2%; gross margin 19.1% vs 53%; operating margin -7.3% vs 14.4% |
| Valuation | CLNE | Value 63 vs 28 |
| Technicals | CWEN | Price vs 50-day -13% vs -5%; vs 200-day -25.6% vs -12.7% |
| Risk Resilience | CWEN | Risk Resilience 37 vs 53 |
| Analyst expectations | CWEN | Target upside 46% vs 51.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CLNE and CWEN 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.
- Only 2 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)
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 CLNE.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10CLNE lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 10 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- CLNE +10
- 43 vs 33
- 7 sessions ago
- CLNE +13
- 44 vs 31
- 30 sessions ago
- CLNE +1
- 39 vs 38
- 90 sessions ago
- CLNE +21
- 51 vs 30
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Jun 8 when CLNE moved ahead of CWEN.
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 / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (14.06%)
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (2.6%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (10.31%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
CLNE 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 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +2.52%, AIQ -2 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.42%, 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.
- 1CWEN closes the Value gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to CLNE's edge.
- 2CWEN's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3CLNE's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 3 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
CWEN leads on balance| Metric | CLNE | CWEN |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -9% | 35.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -23.9% | 173% |
| Gross margin | 19.1% | 53% |
| Operating margin | -7.3% | 14.4% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -16.7% | 2% |
| Debt to equity | 0.58 | 1.81 |
Performance
CWEN leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | CLNE | CWEN |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -7.6% | 0.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -8.6% | -8.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -20.1% | -15.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -27.7% | -16.5% |
| Year to date | -24.3% | -5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -35.4% | 11.4% |
Technicals
CWEN has the stronger structure| Metric | CLNE | CWEN |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 48.1 | 39.2 |
| ADX (14) | 20.4 | 17.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | -13% | -5% |
| Price vs 200-day | -25.6% | -12.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 56.9% | 26.7% |
Risk
CWEN is the more resilient| Metric | CLNE | CWEN |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.07 | 0.7 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.63 | 0.34 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.89 | 0.52 |
| Max drawdown | -48.7% | -25.4% |
| Current drawdown | -48% | -23.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 53.6% | 31.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.7% | -3.1% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CLNE or CWEN?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CLNE is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 43 against CWEN's 33. The edge comes from value and momentum. CWEN 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 CLNE or CWEN the better buy right now?
CLNE 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: only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor CLNE over CWEN?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CLNE leads Value by 35 points; CWEN leads Risk Resilience by 16 points; CLNE leads Momentum by 7 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CLNE or CWEN?
Analyst price targets imply +46% upside for CLNE and +51.7% for CWEN, so the Street currently favors CWEN. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors CLNE. 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, CLNE or CWEN?
CLNE is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CLNE on the peer-relative Value factor, by 35 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, CLNE or CWEN?
CWEN 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, CLNE or CWEN?
CLNE on the Momentum factor, by 7 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, CLNE or CWEN?
CWEN is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CWEN on Risk Resilience, by 16 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 CLNE more profitable than CWEN?
CWEN leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 19.1% vs 53%; operating margin -7.3% vs 14.4%; ttm roe -16.7% vs 2%.
Is CLNE's lead over CWEN getting stronger or weaker?
CLNE lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 10 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 2026-06-08, when CLNE moved ahead of CWEN.
What would change the CLNE vs CWEN verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CWEN closes the Value gap — currently 35 points behind, the largest single contributor to CLNE's edge; CWEN's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; CLNE's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 3 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 CLNE and CWEN?
CLNE: 1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. CWEN: 1 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 CLNE is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On CWEN it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare CLNE and CWEN 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.