CMP vs KALU Stock Comparison
KALU currently leads CMP in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 45 vs 37. The clearest difference is quality, while CMP has the stronger momentum profile.
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 8 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Value, but the lead has narrowed from 18 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support KALU, and its lead is narrowing.
Compass Minerals International, Inc.
Kaiser Aluminum Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors KALU over CMP, 45 versus 37 as of Oct 31, 2026. KALU's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and value, while CMP holds the stronger momentum profile. KALU also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor KALU today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. KALU lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 18 to 8 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
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
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 43KALU +28
- Value49 vs 73KALU +24
- Momentum41 vs 18CMP +23
- Risk Resilience52 vs 41CMP +11
4 of 6 evidence groups favor KALU. KALU’s edge is concentrated in quality and value; CMP keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum -3
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
KALU's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
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 momentum, risk resilience, technicals.
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 24 points.
Momentum
CMPCMP on the Momentum factor, by 23 points.
Lower downside
CMPCMP on Risk Resilience, by 11 points.
Analyst upside
KALUKALU 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 | CMP | KALU | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +33% | +51.9% | KALU has more room |
| Target dispersion | +25.8% | +13.6% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 2 | 4 | 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 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 45 |
| Fundamentals | KALUon balance | revenue growth -52.5% vs -3.4%; EPS growth -143.3% vs -67.9%; TTM ROE 7.1% vs 24.1%; gross margin 17.2% vs 10.7%; operating margin 8.9% vs 7.7% — KALU takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | KALU | Value 49 vs 73 |
| Technicals | CMP | Price vs 50-day -0.8% vs -22.5%; vs 200-day -11.6% vs -21.2% |
| Risk Resilience | CMP | Risk Resilience 52 vs 41 |
| Analyst expectations | KALU | Target upside 33% vs 51.9% |
✓ 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 two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is moderate at 8 points.
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (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 KALU.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28KALU lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 18 to 8 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- KALU +8
- 37 vs 45
- 7 sessions ago
- KALU +8
- 35 vs 43
- 30 sessions ago
- KALU +18
- 34 vs 52
- 90 sessions ago
- KALU +12
- 33 vs 45
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 CMP
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
0 bullish / 4 bearish / 1 neutral
Only KALU
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (6.80%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, Downtrend Structure Active.
CMP 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 is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.66%, AIQ -1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -2.96%, 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.
- 1CMP closes the Quality gap — currently 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to KALU's edge.
- 2CMP's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3KALU starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 10 points over 30 sessions, and a further 8-point move would eliminate KALU's advantage entirely.
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% | -3.4% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -143.3% | -67.9% |
| Gross margin | 17.2% | 10.7% |
| Operating margin | 8.9% | 7.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 7.1% | 24.1% |
| Debt to equity | 2.76 | 1.09 |
Performance
CMP leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | CMP | KALU |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 4.9% | -21.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 4% | -16.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -23% | -24.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -9.6% | -30% |
| Year to date | 16.8% | 5.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 23.5% | 26.2% |
Technicals
CMP has the stronger structure| Metric | CMP | KALU |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 48.8 | 31.9 |
| ADX (14) | 26.5 | 20.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | -0.8% | -22.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | -11.6% | -21.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 35.4% | 96% |
Risk
CMP is the more resilient| Metric | CMP | KALU |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.64 | 2 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.69 | 0.68 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.95 | 0.79 |
| Max drawdown | -37.3% | -46.1% |
| Current drawdown | -31.6% | -38.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 50.4% | 55.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.9% | -4.7% |
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 Oct 31, 2026, scoring 45 against CMP's 37. The edge comes from quality and value. CMP 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 CMP or KALU the better buy right now?
KALU carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 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 KALU over CMP?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. KALU leads Quality by 28 points; KALU leads Value by 24 points; CMP leads Momentum by 23 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 +33% upside for CMP and +51.9% for KALU, so the Street currently favors KALU. 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, 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 24 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?
CMP 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, CMP or KALU?
CMP is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CMP on Risk Resilience, by 11 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 CMP more profitable than KALU?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 17.2% vs 10.7%; operating margin 8.9% vs 7.7%; ttm roe 7.1% vs 24.1%. 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: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 18 to 8 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. 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 28 points behind, the largest single contributor to KALU's edge; CMP's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; KALU starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 10 points over 30 sessions, and a further 8-point move would eliminate KALU's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about CMP and KALU?
CMP: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. KALU: 0 bullish / 4 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 CMP is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On KALU it is Death Cross Active (bearish, 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.