CMS vs DTE Stock Comparison
Compare CMS and DTE across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between CMS and DTE?
CMS leads the current stock comparison as CMS Energy Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
CMS Energy Corporation vs DTE Energy Company
CMS leads
CMS leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Quality.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support CMS, and its current signal state is conflicted.
CMS Energy Corporation
DTE Energy Company
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors CMS over DTE, 43 versus 41 as of Sep 11, 2026. CMS's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality, while DTE holds the stronger value profile. CMS also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CMS today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. CMS lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions.
Compare CMS Energy Corporation and DTE Energy Company 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 CMS and DTE 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.
- Quality41 vs 27CMS +14
- Value52 vs 57DTE +5
- Momentum27 vs 31DTE +4
- Risk Resilience53 vs 52Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor CMS. CMS’s edge is concentrated in quality; DTE keeps a meaningful value 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 -2
No new signals fired.
CMS's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CMS and DTE both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
CMS (CMS Energy Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality.
DTE (DTE Energy Company): the counter-case, on value, momentum, valuation.
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
CMSCMS on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
DTEDTE on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
DTEDTE on the peer-relative Value factor, by 5 points.
Momentum
DTEDTE on the Momentum factor, by 4 points.
Lower downside
CMSCMS carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
CMSCMS 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 | CMS | DTE | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +20.6% | +18.5% | CMS has more room |
| Target dispersion | +14.8% | +18.5% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 8 | 7 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor CMS. 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 | 43 vs 41 |
| Fundamentals | CMSon balance | revenue growth -33% vs -35.1%; EPS growth -65.5% vs 14.3%; TTM ROE 11% vs 10.8%; gross margin 69.7% vs 36.7%; operating margin 18.9% vs 12.3% — CMS takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | DTE | Value 52 vs 57 |
| Technicals | DTE | Price vs 50-day -6.5% vs -6.9%; vs 200-day -7.7% vs -4.4% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 53 vs 52 |
| Analyst expectations | CMS | Target upside 20.6% vs 18.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CMS and DTE 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 narrow at 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Signal direction runs against the verdict: the leader is net-bearish while the laggard is net-bullish. (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 CMS.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10CMS lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 2 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- CMS +2
- 43 vs 41
- 7 sessions ago
- CMS +3
- 42 vs 39
- 30 sessions ago
- CMS +2
- 43 vs 41
- 90 sessions ago
- CMS +2
- 53 vs 51
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Jul 23 when CMS moved ahead of DTE.
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 (2.32%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (0.7%)
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.68%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
CMS 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 down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.78%, AIQ +1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.31%, 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.
- 1DTE closes the Quality gap — currently 14 points behind, the largest single contributor to CMS's edge.
- 2DTE's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3CMS'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
CMS leads on balance| Metric | CMS | DTE |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -33% | -35.1% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -65.5% | 14.3% |
| Gross margin | 69.7% | 36.7% |
| Operating margin | 18.9% | 12.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 11% | 10.8% |
| Debt to equity | 1.97 | 2.29 |
Performance
DTE leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | CMS | DTE |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.6% | -1.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -3.3% | -3.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -7.9% | -8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -10.8% | -8.3% |
| Year to date | -2.7% | 4.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -4.3% | -0.3% |
Technicals
DTE has the stronger structure| Metric | CMS | DTE |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 32.1 | 36.4 |
| ADX (14) | 17.2 | 17.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | -6.5% | -6.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | -7.7% | -4.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 12.8% | 13.6% |
Risk
Split| Metric | CMS | DTE |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.16 | -0.02 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.42 | -0.18 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.61 | -0.28 |
| Max drawdown | -15.3% | -13% |
| Current drawdown | -15.3% | -13% |
| Annualized volatility | 17.2% | 17.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.8% | -1.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CMS or DTE?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, CMS is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 43 against DTE's 41. The edge comes from quality. DTE is not without a case — it holds the better value 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 CMS or DTE the better buy right now?
CMS 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: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor CMS over DTE?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. CMS leads Quality by 14 points; DTE leads Value by 5 points; DTE leads Momentum by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CMS or DTE?
Analyst price targets imply +20.6% upside for CMS and +18.5% for DTE, so the Street currently favors CMS. 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, CMS or DTE?
DTE is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. DTE on the peer-relative Value factor, by 5 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, CMS or DTE?
DTE 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, CMS or DTE?
DTE on the Momentum factor, by 4 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, CMS or DTE?
CMS is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. CMS 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 CMS more profitable than DTE?
CMS leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 69.7% vs 36.7%; operating margin 18.9% vs 12.3%; ttm roe 11% vs 10.8%.
Is CMS's lead over DTE getting stronger or weaker?
CMS 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 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-23, when CMS moved ahead of DTE.
What would change the CMS vs DTE verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: DTE closes the Quality gap — currently 14 points behind, the largest single contributor to CMS's edge; DTE's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; CMS'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 CMS and DTE?
CMS: 1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. DTE: 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 CMS is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On DTE it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare CMS and DTE 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.