CMP vs KALU Stock Comparison
Compare CMP and KALU across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between CMP and KALU?
KALU leads the current stock comparison as Kaiser Aluminum Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Compass Minerals International, Inc. vs Kaiser Aluminum Corporation
KALU leads
KALU leads by 16 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Value. Wall Street currently favors CMP on target upside.
Stable: 4 of 6 evidence groups support KALU, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Compass Minerals International, Inc.
Kaiser Aluminum Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors KALU over CMP, 53 versus 37 as of Sep 11, 2026. KALU's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and value. KALU also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors CMP. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor KALU today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability. KALU lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 16 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Compass Minerals International, Inc. and Kaiser Aluminum Corporation 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 CMP and KALU 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.
- Quality15 vs 45KALU +30
- Value49 vs 63KALU +14
- Momentum45 vs 59KALU +14
- Risk Resilience44 vs 41Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor KALU. KALU’s edge is concentrated in quality and value.
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 -4
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -20
No new signals fired.
KALU's lead narrowed by 4 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CMP and KALU both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
KALU (Kaiser Aluminum Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and value.
CMP (Compass Minerals International, Inc.): the counter-case, on analyst expectations.
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
KALUKALU on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
KALUKALU on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
KALUKALU on the peer-relative Value factor, by 14 points.
Momentum
KALUKALU on the Momentum factor, by 14 points.
Lower downside
CMPCMP carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
CMPCMP on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors KALU, analyst targets favor CMP. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | CMP | KALU | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +25% | +9.1% | CMP has more room |
| Target dispersion | +25.8% | +27.4% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 2 | 3 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor KALU. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | KALU | 37 vs 53 |
| Fundamentals | KALUon balance | revenue growth -52.5% vs 13.5%; EPS growth -143.3% vs 53.8%; TTM ROE 7.1% vs 26.3%; gross margin 17.2% vs 11.5%; operating margin 8.9% vs 8.2% — KALU takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | KALU | Value 49 vs 63 |
| Technicals | KALU | Price vs 50-day -10.1% vs -5.5%; vs 200-day -1.4% vs 7.5% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 44 vs 41 |
| Analyst expectations | CMP | Target upside 25% vs 9.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CMP and KALU and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 16 points. (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 KALU.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10KALU lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 16 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- KALU +16
- 37 vs 53
- 7 sessions ago
- KALU +9
- 38 vs 47
- 30 sessions ago
- KALU +15
- 33 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- KALU +12
- 34 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.
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (8.48%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.45%)
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (12.93%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.95%)
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
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 down over the latest session (price -1.08%, AIQ -1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -0.77%, AIQ -5 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.
- 1CMP closes the Quality gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to KALU's edge.
- 2CMP's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3KALU'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
KALU leads on balance| Metric | CMP | KALU |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -52.5% | 13.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -143.3% | 53.8% |
| Gross margin | 17.2% | 11.5% |
| Operating margin | 8.9% | 8.2% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 7.1% | 26.3% |
| Debt to equity | 2.76 | 1.13 |
Performance
KALU leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | CMP | KALU |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2% | -2.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -5.9% | -16.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -13.4% | -9.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 9.1% | 24.2% |
| Year to date | 27.6% | 37.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 31.6% | 106.6% |
Technicals
KALU has the stronger structure| Metric | CMP | KALU |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 53.1 | 60.3 |
| ADX (14) | 29.9 | 12.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -10.1% | -5.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | -1.4% | 7.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 46.4% | 58% |
Risk
Split| Metric | CMP | KALU |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.67 | 1.81 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.79 | 1.64 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.07 | 2.64 |
| Max drawdown | -27.1% | -26% |
| Current drawdown | -25.2% | -19% |
| Annualized volatility | 51.6% | 52.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.1% | -4.5% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CMP or KALU?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, KALU is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 53 against CMP's 37. The edge comes from quality and value. 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 CMP or KALU the better buy right now?
KALU carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Stable — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Stable rating means the gap is wide and the evidence is broad, so the conclusion is unlikely to turn on a single session.
Why does the AIQ Score favor KALU over CMP?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. KALU leads Quality by 30 points; KALU leads Value by 14 points; KALU leads Momentum by 14 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CMP or KALU?
Analyst price targets imply +25% upside for CMP and +9.1% for KALU, so the Street currently favors CMP. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors KALU. 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, CMP or KALU?
KALU is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. KALU on the peer-relative Value factor, by 14 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, CMP or KALU?
KALU 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, CMP or KALU?
KALU on the Momentum factor, by 14 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, CMP or KALU?
CMP is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CMP 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 CMP more profitable than KALU?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 17.2% vs 11.5%; operating margin 8.9% vs 8.2%; ttm roe 7.1% vs 26.3%. CMP leads on two measures and KALU on one measure, 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 KALU's lead over CMP getting stronger or weaker?
KALU lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 16 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has not changed hands in that window.
What would change the CMP vs KALU verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CMP closes the Quality gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to KALU's edge; CMP's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; KALU'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 CMP and KALU?
CMP: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral. KALU: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. The most decision-relevant rule on CMP is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On KALU it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare CMP and KALU 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.