COHU vs ENTG Stock Comparison
COHU currently leads ENTG in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 42 vs 41. The clearest difference is value, while ENTG has the stronger momentum profile.
What is the main difference between COHU and ENTG?
COHU leads the current stock comparison as Cohu, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Cohu, Inc. vs Entegris, Inc.
COHU leads
COHU leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Value. Wall Street currently favors ENTG on target upside.
Fragile: 2 of 6 evidence groups support COHU, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Cohu, Inc.
Entegris, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors COHU over ENTG, 42 versus 41 as of Oct 21, 2026. COHU's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value, while ENTG holds the stronger momentum profile. COHU also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors ENTG. 2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor COHU today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. COHU lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Cohu, Inc. and Entegris, Inc. 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 COHU and ENTG 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.
- Value59 vs 44COHU +15
- Momentum23 vs 31ENTG +8
- Quality41 vs 45ENTG +4
- Risk Resilience43 vs 46Even
2 of 6 evidence groups favor COHU. COHU’s edge is concentrated in value; ENTG keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum -2
New signals
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
COHU's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — COHU and ENTG both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
COHU (Cohu, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value.
ENTG (Entegris, Inc.): the counter-case, on momentum, quality, fundamentals.
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
COHUCOHU on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
COHUCOHU on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
COHUCOHU on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 points.
Momentum
ENTGENTG on the Momentum factor, by 8 points.
Lower downside
ENTGENTG carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
ENTGENTG on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors COHU, analyst targets favor ENTG. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | COHU | ENTG | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +14.5% | +22.1% | ENTG has more room |
| Target dispersion | +33.2% | +55.4% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 6 | 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
2 of 6 covered evidence groups favor COHU. 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 | 42 vs 41 |
| Fundamentals | ENTGon balance | revenue growth 19.1% vs 8.8%; EPS growth 98.7% vs 1.7%; TTM ROE -4.9% vs 7.6%; gross margin 39.2% vs 45.5%; operating margin -6.4% vs 30% — ENTG takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | COHU | Value 59 vs 44 |
| Technicals | COHU | Price vs 50-day -4.7% vs 0%; vs 200-day 14.2% vs 4.8% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 43 vs 46 |
| Analyst expectations | ENTG | Target upside 14.5% vs 22.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of COHU and ENTG 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 1 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)
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 COHU.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20COHU lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- COHU +1
- 42 vs 41
- 7 sessions ago
- Level
- 43 vs 43
- 30 sessions ago
- COHU +3
- 56 vs 53
- 90 sessions ago
- COHU +2
- 57 vs 55
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Aug 14 when COHU moved ahead of ENTG.
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 / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only COHU
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only ENTG
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode, MACD Bearish Crossover.
COHU 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 up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +4.84%, AIQ -1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +3.35%, 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.
- 1ENTG closes the Value gap — currently 15 points behind, the largest single contributor to COHU's edge.
- 2ENTG's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3COHU's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 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
ENTG leads on balance| Metric | COHU | ENTG |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 19.1% | 8.8% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 98.7% | 1.7% |
| Gross margin | 39.2% | 45.5% |
| Operating margin | -6.4% | 30% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -4.9% | 7.6% |
| Debt to equity | 0.42 | 0.86 |
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | COHU | ENTG |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -16% | -11.3% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -18.3% | -5.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -4.1% | 3.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 22.9% | -2.8% |
| Year to date | 126.6% | 69.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 136.7% | 57.8% |
Technicals
COHU has the stronger structure| Metric | COHU | ENTG |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 26.5 | 40.4 |
| ADX (14) | 26.8 | 17.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | -4.7% | 0% |
| Price vs 200-day | 14.2% | 4.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 62.1% | 46.5% |
Risk
Split| Metric | COHU | ENTG |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.82 | 3.22 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.58 | 0.95 |
| Sortino ratio | 2.36 | 1.52 |
| Max drawdown | -46.8% | -41.8% |
| Current drawdown | -28.6% | -22.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 69.1% | 67.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -6.6% | -6.9% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, COHU or ENTG?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, COHU is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 42 against ENTG's 41. The edge comes from value. ENTG 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 COHU or ENTG the better buy right now?
COHU carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 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 1 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor COHU over ENTG?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. COHU leads Value by 15 points; ENTG leads Momentum by 8 points; ENTG leads Quality by 4 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, COHU or ENTG?
Analyst price targets imply +14.5% upside for COHU and +22.1% for ENTG, so the Street currently favors ENTG. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors COHU. 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, COHU or ENTG?
COHU is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. COHU on the peer-relative Value factor, by 15 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, COHU or ENTG?
COHU 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, COHU or ENTG?
ENTG on the Momentum factor, by 8 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, COHU or ENTG?
ENTG is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. ENTG 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 COHU more profitable than ENTG?
ENTG leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 39.2% vs 45.5%; operating margin -6.4% vs 30%; ttm roe -4.9% vs 7.6%.
Is COHU's lead over ENTG getting stronger or weaker?
COHU lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 1 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-21 and 2026-10-20. The lead has changed hands 4 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-14, when COHU moved ahead of ENTG.
What would change the COHU vs ENTG verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: ENTG closes the Value gap — currently 15 points behind, the largest single contributor to COHU's edge; ENTG's ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; COHU's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 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 COHU and ENTG?
COHU: 2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. ENTG: 2 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. 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 COHU is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On ENTG it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare COHU and ENTG 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.