CLOV vs CVS Stock Comparison
Compare CLOV and CVS across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between CLOV and CVS?
CVS leads the current stock comparison as CVS Health Corp., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Clover Health Investments, Corp. vs CVS Health Corp.
CVS leads
CVS leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Risk Resilience.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support CVS, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Clover Health Investments, Corp.
CVS Health Corp.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CVS over CLOV, 51 versus 49 as of Sep 11, 2026. CVS's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and risk resilience, while CLOV holds the stronger momentum profile. CVS also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CVS today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. CVS lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Clover Health Investments, Corp. and CVS Health Corp. 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 CLOV and CVS 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.
- Value42 vs 70CVS +28
- Momentum78 vs 55CLOV +23
- Risk Resilience35 vs 53CVS +18
- Quality38 vs 28CLOV +10
4 of 6 evidence groups favor CVS. CVS’s edge is concentrated in value and risk resilience; CLOV 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 +23
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -1
No new signals fired.
CVS's lead narrowed by 5 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CLOV and CVS both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CVS (CVS Health Corp.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and risk resilience.
CLOV (Clover Health Investments, Corp.): the counter-case, on momentum, quality, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 47.5% against 24.2%.
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
CVSCVS on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CVSCVS on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CVSCVS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 28 points.
Momentum
CLOVCLOV on the Momentum factor, by 23 points.
Lower downside
CVSCVS on Risk Resilience, by 18 points.
Analyst upside
CVSCVS 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 | CLOV | CVS | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +0.8% | +15.9% | CVS has more room |
| Target dispersion | +26.7% | +31% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 2 | 14 | 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 CVS. 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 | 49 vs 51 |
| Fundamentals | CVSon balance | TTM ROE -5.4% vs 6.4%; gross margin 18.6% vs 14.2%; operating margin -0.7% vs 2% — CVS takes 2 of 3 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | CVS | Value 42 vs 70 |
| Technicals | CLOV | Price vs 50-day 8.1% vs -5.6%; vs 200-day 48.5% vs 9.7% |
| Risk Resilience | CVS | Risk Resilience 35 vs 53 |
| Analyst expectations | CVS | Target upside 0.8% vs 15.9% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CLOV and CVS 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 narrow at 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 CVS.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10CVS lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- CVS +2
- 49 vs 51
- 7 sessions ago
- CVS +11
- 41 vs 52
- 30 sessions ago
- CVS +4
- 40 vs 44
- 90 sessions ago
- CVS +10
- 45 vs 55
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Aug 10 when CVS moved ahead of CLOV.
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 / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (40.62%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (15.51%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
CLOV 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.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +2.34%, AIQ +5 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.66%, 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.
- 1CLOV closes the Value gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to CVS's edge.
- 2CLOV's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3CVS'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
CVS leads on balance| Metric | CLOV | CVS |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -0.8% | 5.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -4.6% | 0.9% |
| Gross margin | 18.6% | 14.2% |
| Operating margin | -0.7% | 2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -5.4% | 6.4% |
| Debt to equity | 0 | 0.96 |
Performance
CLOV leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | CLOV | CVS |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 9.5% | -2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 3.7% | 0.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -3.7% | -2.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 128.7% | 25.8% |
| Year to date | 100.4% | 20.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 71.9% | 35.6% |
Technicals
CLOV has the stronger structure| Metric | CLOV | CVS |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 81.1 | 56.4 |
| ADX (14) | 11.3 | 24.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 8.1% | -5.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 48.5% | 9.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 47.5% | 24.2% |
Risk
CVS is the more resilient| Metric | CLOV | CVS |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.18 | 0.16 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1 | 0.96 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.8 | 1.17 |
| Max drawdown | -55.5% | -16.4% |
| Current drawdown | -12.9% | -13.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 67.3% | 30.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.8% | -2.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CLOV or CVS?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CVS is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 51 against CLOV's 49. The edge comes from value and risk resilience. CLOV 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 CLOV or CVS the better buy right now?
CVS 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 CVS over CLOV?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CVS leads Value by 28 points; CLOV leads Momentum by 23 points; CVS leads Risk Resilience by 18 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CLOV or CVS?
Analyst price targets imply +0.8% upside for CLOV and +15.9% for CVS, so the Street currently favors CVS. 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, CLOV or CVS?
CVS is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CVS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 28 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, CLOV or CVS?
CVS 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, CLOV or CVS?
CLOV on the Momentum factor, by 23 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, CLOV or CVS?
CVS is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CVS on Risk Resilience, by 18 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 CLOV more profitable than CVS?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 18.6% vs 14.2%; operating margin -0.7% vs 2%; ttm roe -5.4% vs 6.4%. CLOV leads on one measure and CVS on two measures, and there is no single profitability composite that resolves the split — which of the two reads as "more profitable" depends on whether you weight pricing power or operating leverage.
Is CVS's lead over CLOV getting stronger or weaker?
CVS lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 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 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-10, when CVS moved ahead of CLOV.
What would change the CLOV vs CVS verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CLOV closes the Value gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to CVS's edge; CLOV's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; CVS'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 CLOV and CVS?
CLOV: 4 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. CVS: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. 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 CLOV is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On CVS it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare CLOV and CVS 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.