CNP vs DUK Stock Comparison
Compare CNP and DUK across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between CNP and DUK?
DUK leads the current stock comparison as Duke Energy Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
CenterPoint Energy, Inc. vs Duke Energy Corporation
DUK leads
DUK leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Value. Wall Street currently favors CNP on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support DUK, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
CenterPoint Energy, Inc.
Duke Energy Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors DUK over CNP, 45 versus 41 as of Sep 11, 2026. DUK's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and value. DUK also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors CNP. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor DUK today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. DUK lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 4 points over 30 sessions.
Compare CenterPoint Energy, Inc. and Duke Energy 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 CNP and DUK 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.
- Quality34 vs 45DUK +11
- Value48 vs 53DUK +5
- Momentum34 vs 31Even
- Risk Resilience52 vs 52Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor DUK. DUK’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 -3
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -1
No new signals fired.
DUK's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CNP and DUK both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
DUK (Duke Energy Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and value.
CNP (CenterPoint Energy, 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
DUKDUK on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
DUKDUK on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
DUKDUK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 5 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
DUKDUK carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
CNPCNP on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors DUK, analyst targets favor CNP. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | CNP | DUK | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +18.3% | +14.6% | CNP has more room |
| Target dispersion | +21.6% | +7.3% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 9 | 9 | 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 DUK. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | DUK | 41 vs 45 |
| Fundamentals | DUKon balance | revenue growth -27.7% vs -17.3%; EPS growth -22.9% vs -29.9%; TTM ROE 9.9% vs 9.9%; gross margin 54.1% vs 68.2%; operating margin 23.2% vs 27.6% — DUK takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | DUK | Value 48 vs 53 |
| Technicals | DUK | Price vs 50-day -6% vs -3.9%; vs 200-day -5.6% vs -3.7% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 52 vs 52 |
| Analyst expectations | CNP | Target upside 18.3% vs 14.6% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CNP and DUK 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 4 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (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 DUK.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10DUK lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 4 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- DUK +4
- 41 vs 45
- 7 sessions ago
- DUK +3
- 41 vs 44
- 30 sessions ago
- DUK +6
- 39 vs 45
- 90 sessions ago
- DUK +4
- 50 vs 54
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Jun 23 when DUK moved ahead of CNP.
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 / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.32%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.05%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.03%, AIQ -1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.04%, 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.
- 1CNP closes the Quality gap — currently 11 points behind, the largest single contributor to DUK's edge.
- 2CNP's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3DUK'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
DUK leads on balance| Metric | CNP | DUK |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -27.7% | -17.3% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -22.9% | -29.9% |
| Gross margin | 54.1% | 68.2% |
| Operating margin | 23.2% | 27.6% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 9.9% | 9.9% |
| Debt to equity | 2.14 | 1.67 |
Performance
DUK leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | CNP | DUK |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1% | -1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -3.5% | -3.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -8.5% | -4.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -8.9% | -8.2% |
| Year to date | 2% | 1.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 4.8% | -0.7% |
Technicals
DUK has the stronger structure| Metric | CNP | DUK |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 40.5 | 37.4 |
| ADX (14) | 9.4 | 18.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -6% | -3.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | -5.6% | -3.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 18.4% | 13.8% |
Risk
Split| Metric | CNP | DUK |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | -0.13 | -0.3 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.1 | -0.22 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.14 | -0.34 |
| Max drawdown | -13.9% | -11.7% |
| Current drawdown | -13.1% | -10.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 17.2% | 16.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.8% | -1.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CNP or DUK?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, DUK is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 45 against CNP's 41. 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 CNP or DUK the better buy right now?
DUK 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 DUK over CNP?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. DUK leads Quality by 11 points; DUK leads Value by 5 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CNP or DUK?
Analyst price targets imply +18.3% upside for CNP and +14.6% for DUK, so the Street currently favors CNP. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors DUK. 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, CNP or DUK?
DUK is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. DUK 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, CNP or DUK?
DUK 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, CNP or DUK?
The two are level on Momentum. 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, CNP or DUK?
DUK is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. DUK 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 CNP more profitable than DUK?
DUK leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 54.1% vs 68.2%; operating margin 23.2% vs 27.6%; ttm roe 9.9% vs 9.9%.
Is DUK's lead over CNP getting stronger or weaker?
DUK lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 4 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 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-06-23, when DUK moved ahead of CNP.
What would change the CNP vs DUK verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CNP closes the Quality gap — currently 11 points behind, the largest single contributor to DUK's edge; CNP's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; DUK'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 CNP and DUK?
CNP: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. DUK: 2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral. The most decision-relevant rule on CNP is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On DUK it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare CNP and DUK 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.