COTY vs CPB Stock Comparison
Compare COTY and CPB across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between COTY and CPB?
COTY leads the current stock comparison as Coty Inc., with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Coty Inc. vs Campbell Soup Company
COTY leads
COTY leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, and the lead has widened from 2 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support COTY, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Coty Inc.
Campbell Soup Company
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors COTY over CPB, 46 versus 40 as of Sep 11, 2026. COTY's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience, while CPB holds the stronger value profile. COTY also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor COTY today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. COTY lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 2 to 6 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Coty Inc. and Campbell Soup 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 COTY and CPB 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.
- Momentum42 vs 24COTY +18
- Risk Resilience38 vs 26COTY +12
- Quality39 vs 32COTY +7
- Value61 vs 67CPB +6
4 of 6 evidence groups favor COTY. COTY’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience; CPB 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 -5
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience -2
New signals
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
COTY's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — COTY and CPB both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
COTY (Coty Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.
CPB (Campbell Soup Company): the counter-case, on value, 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
COTYCOTY on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
COTYCOTY on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CPBCPB on the peer-relative Value factor, by 6 points.
Momentum
COTYCOTY on the Momentum factor, by 18 points.
Lower downside
COTYCOTY on Risk Resilience, by 12 points.
Analyst upside
COTYCOTY 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 | COTY | CPB | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | -2.2% | -5.9% | COTY has more room |
| Target dispersion | +37.9% | +30.4% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 5 | 13 | 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 COTY. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | COTY | 46 vs 40 |
| Fundamentals | Even | EPS growth 66% vs -14.3%; TTM ROE -18.1% vs 15.3%; gross margin 59.1% vs 28.8%; operating margin 5% vs 11.5% |
| Valuation | CPB | Value 61 vs 67 |
| Technicals | COTY | Price vs 50-day 1.5% vs -7.3%; vs 200-day 1.5% vs -12.6% |
| Risk Resilience | COTY | Risk Resilience 38 vs 26 |
| Analyst expectations | COTY | Target upside -2.2% vs -5.9% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of COTY and CPB 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 6 points.
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (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 COTY.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10COTY lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 2 to 6 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- COTY +6
- 46 vs 40
- 7 sessions ago
- COTY +13
- 54 vs 41
- 30 sessions ago
- COTY +2
- 54 vs 52
- 90 sessions ago
- COTY +3
- 52 vs 49
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Aug 25 when COTY moved ahead of CPB.
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 / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (2.64%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (5.52%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 4 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (5.81%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
COTY 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 +2.66%, AIQ -1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.29%, 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.
- 1CPB closes the Momentum gap — currently 18 points behind, the largest single contributor to COTY's edge.
- 2CPB's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3COTY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 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
Split| Metric | COTY | CPB |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -1% | -7.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 66% | -14.3% |
| Gross margin | 59.1% | 28.8% |
| Operating margin | 5% | 11.5% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -18.1% | 15.3% |
| Debt to equity | 1.15 | 1.74 |
Performance
COTY leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | COTY | CPB |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -9.3% | -11.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -4.7% | -7.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 32.2% | -8.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 12.4% | -8.7% |
| Year to date | -14.6% | -24.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -39.1% | -37.3% |
Technicals
COTY has the stronger structure| Metric | COTY | CPB |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 42.1 | 25.2 |
| ADX (14) | 18.5 | 24.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1.5% | -7.3% |
| Price vs 200-day | 1.5% | -12.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 67.9% | 40.5% |
Risk
COTY is the more resilient| Metric | COTY | CPB |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.71 | -0.28 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.8 | -1.47 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.14 | -2 |
| Max drawdown | -58.4% | -40.8% |
| Current drawdown | -40.9% | -38% |
| Annualized volatility | 49.7% | 31.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -5.1% | -3.6% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, COTY or CPB?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, COTY is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 46 against CPB's 40. The edge comes from momentum and risk resilience. CPB 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 COTY or CPB the better buy right now?
COTY 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 COTY over CPB?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. COTY leads Momentum by 18 points; COTY leads Risk Resilience by 12 points; COTY leads Quality by 7 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, COTY or CPB?
Analyst price targets imply -2.2% upside for COTY and -5.9% for CPB, so the Street currently favors COTY. 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, COTY or CPB?
CPB is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CPB on the peer-relative Value factor, by 6 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, COTY or CPB?
COTY 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, COTY or CPB?
COTY on the Momentum factor, by 18 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, COTY or CPB?
COTY is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. COTY on Risk Resilience, by 12 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 COTY more profitable than CPB?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 59.1% vs 28.8%; operating margin 5% vs 11.5%; ttm roe -18.1% vs 15.3%. COTY leads on one measure and CPB on two measures, 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 COTY's lead over CPB getting stronger or weaker?
COTY lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 2 to 6 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 2026-08-25, when COTY moved ahead of CPB.
What would change the COTY vs CPB verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CPB closes the Momentum gap — currently 18 points behind, the largest single contributor to COTY's edge; CPB's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; COTY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 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 COTY and CPB?
COTY: 1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. CPB: 2 bullish / 4 bearish / 2 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 COTY is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On CPB it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare COTY and CPB 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.