CRS vs HEI Stock Comparison
HEI currently leads CRS in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 51 vs 42. The clearest difference is momentum, while CRS has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between CRS and HEI?
HEI leads the current stock comparison as HEICO Corporation, with the clearest separation coming from momentum and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Carpenter Technology Corporation vs HEICO Corporation
HEI leads
HEI leads by 9 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, having only recently taken the lead back from CRS. Wall Street currently favors CRS on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support HEI, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Carpenter Technology Corporation
HEICO Corporation
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors HEI over CRS, 51 versus 42 as of Oct 31, 2026. HEI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience, while CRS holds the stronger value profile. HEI also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors CRS. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor HEI today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. HEI lead: Reversed — CRS led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; HEI now leads by 9.
Compare Carpenter Technology Corporation and HEICO 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 CRS and HEI 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.
- Momentum12 vs 61HEI +49
- Risk Resilience51 vs 73HEI +22
- Value39 vs 25CRS +14
- Quality66 vs 59CRS +7
4 of 6 evidence groups favor HEI. HEI’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience; CRS keeps a meaningful value 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 +4
New signals
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (3.0%)
Largest factor move: Momentum +2, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
HEI's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CRS and HEI both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
HEI (HEICO Corporation): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.
CRS (Carpenter Technology Corporation): the counter-case, on value, quality, valuation — but at materially higher volatility, 74.3% against 24.9%.
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
HEIHEI on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
HEIHEI on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CRSCRS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 14 points.
Momentum
HEIHEI on the Momentum factor, by 49 points.
Lower downside
HEIHEI on Risk Resilience, by 22 points.
Analyst upside
CRSCRS on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors HEI, analyst targets favor CRS. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | CRS | HEI | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +87.5% | +22.1% | CRS has more room |
| Target dispersion | +48% | +37.2% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 4 | 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.
Dividend growth
| Dividend metric | CRS | HEI |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 0.00% | 7.53% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $0.800 | $0.160 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $0.800 | $0.230 |
| Years increased | 0 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #349 | #162 |
HEI grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 7.53% a year against CRS's 0.00%. Neither company reduced its regular dividend in any year of the window.
Yield and payout ratio shown elsewhere on this page are current values, not part of the study window.
Split-adjusted regular dividends per share, 2020–2025, excluding special dividends. Research as of Sep 19, 2026.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor HEI. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | HEI | 42 vs 51 |
| Fundamentals | HEIon balance | revenue growth -6.2% vs 2.7%; EPS growth 0.3% vs 0.6%; TTM ROE 26.9% vs 18.3%; gross margin 31.2% vs 40.4%; operating margin 23.4% vs 24% — HEI takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | CRS | Value 39 vs 25 |
| Technicals | HEI | Price vs 50-day -30.8% vs 2.5%; vs 200-day -35.9% vs -2.7% |
| Risk Resilience | HEI | Risk Resilience 51 vs 73 |
| Analyst expectations | CRS | Target upside 87.5% vs 22.1% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CRS and HEI 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 moderate at 9 points.
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 HEI.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28HEI lead: Reversed — CRS led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; HEI now leads by 9.
- Today
- HEI +9
- 42 vs 51
- 7 sessions ago
- HEI +10
- 37 vs 47
- 30 sessions ago
- CRS +1
- 48 vs 47
- 90 sessions ago
- HEI +4
- 38 vs 42
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Oct 15 when HEI moved ahead of CRS.
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 / 5 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only CRS
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (6.43%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (3.0%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
Only HEI
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, Downtrend Structure Active.
HEI 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 -5.24%, AIQ +1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.53%, 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.
- 1CRS closes the Momentum gap — currently 49 points behind, the largest single contributor to HEI's edge.
- 2CRS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3HEI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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
HEI leads on balance| Metric | CRS | HEI |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | -6.2% | 2.7% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 0.3% | 0.6% |
| Gross margin | 31.2% | 40.4% |
| Operating margin | 23.4% | 24% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 26.9% | 18.3% |
| Debt to equity | 0.32 | 0.51 |
Performance
HEI leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | CRS | HEI |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -23.2% | 4.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -26.4% | 2.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -44.4% | -12.2% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -31.1% | 16.5% |
| Year to date | -8.1% | -3.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -6.8% | -1.9% |
Technicals
HEI has the stronger structure| Metric | CRS | HEI |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 8.1 | 65.5 |
| ADX (14) | 63.4 | 20.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -30.8% | 2.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | -35.9% | -2.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 74.3% | 24.9% |
Risk
HEI is the more resilient| Metric | CRS | HEI |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.62 | 1.15 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.05 | 0.02 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.07 | 0.03 |
| Max drawdown | -54.8% | -27.1% |
| Current drawdown | -54.8% | -17% |
| Annualized volatility | 47.7% | 32.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.2% | -2.8% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CRS or HEI?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, HEI is the stronger of the two as of Oct 31, 2026, scoring 51 against CRS's 42. The edge comes from momentum and risk resilience. CRS 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 CRS or HEI the better buy right now?
HEI carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 31, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor HEI over CRS?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. HEI leads Momentum by 49 points; HEI leads Risk Resilience by 22 points; CRS leads Value by 14 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CRS or HEI?
Analyst price targets imply +87.5% upside for CRS and +22.1% for HEI, so the Street currently favors CRS. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors HEI. 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, CRS or HEI?
CRS is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CRS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 14 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, CRS or HEI?
HEI 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, CRS or HEI?
HEI on the Momentum factor, by 49 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, CRS or HEI?
HEI is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. HEI on Risk Resilience, by 22 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 CRS more profitable than HEI?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 31.2% vs 40.4%; operating margin 23.4% vs 24%; ttm roe 26.9% vs 18.3%. CRS leads on one measure and HEI 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 HEI's lead over CRS getting stronger or weaker?
HEI lead: Reversed — CRS led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; HEI now leads by 9. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-06-29 and 2026-10-28. The lead has changed hands 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-10-15, when HEI moved ahead of CRS.
What would change the CRS vs HEI verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CRS closes the Momentum gap — currently 49 points behind, the largest single contributor to HEI's edge; CRS's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; HEI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 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 CRS and HEI?
CRS: 1 bullish / 5 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. HEI: 1 bullish / 2 bearish, 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 CRS is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On HEI it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare CRS and HEI 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.