CTVA vs DD Stock Comparison
DD currently leads CTVA in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 52 vs 42. The clearest difference is risk resilience, while CTVA has the stronger quality profile.
What is the main difference between CTVA and DD?
DD leads the current stock comparison as DuPont de Nemours, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Corteva, Inc. vs DuPont de Nemours, Inc.
DD leads
DD leads by 10 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Momentum. Wall Street currently favors CTVA on target upside.
Fragile: 4 of 6 evidence groups support DD, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Corteva, Inc.
DuPont de Nemours, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors DD over CTVA, 52 versus 42 as of Oct 21, 2026. DD's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and momentum, while CTVA holds the stronger quality profile. DD also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors CTVA. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor DD today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. DD lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 10 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Corteva, Inc. and DuPont de Nemours, 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 CTVA and DD 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.
- Risk Resilience41 vs 78DD +37
- Momentum24 vs 49DD +25
- Quality53 vs 42CTVA +11
- Value46 vs 50DD +4
4 of 6 evidence groups favor DD. DD’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and momentum; CTVA keeps a meaningful quality 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 +4
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +9
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
DD's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CTVA and DD both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
DD (DuPont de Nemours, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and momentum.
CTVA (Corteva, Inc.): the counter-case, on quality, fundamentals, 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
DDDD on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CTVACTVA on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
DDDD on the peer-relative Value factor, by 4 points.
Momentum
DDDD on the Momentum factor, by 25 points.
Lower downside
DDDD on Risk Resilience, by 37 points.
Analyst upside
CTVACTVA on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors DD, analyst targets favor CTVA. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | CTVA | DD | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +414.8% | -16.7% | CTVA has more room |
| Target dispersion | +134.4% | +111.9% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 11 | 4 | 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 | CTVA | DD |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 6.13% | 7.32% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $0.520 | $1.506 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $0.700 | $2.144 |
| Years increased | 5 | 4 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #208 | not ranked |
DD grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 7.32% a year against CTVA's 6.13%. 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 DD. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | DD | 42 vs 52 |
| Fundamentals | CTVA | revenue growth 30.1% vs 8.2%; EPS growth 61.7% vs -9.4%; gross margin 48.5% vs 34.4%; operating margin 17.1% vs 14.7% |
| Valuation | DD | Value 46 vs 50 |
| Technicals | DD | Price vs 50-day -79.6% vs 0.8%; vs 200-day -82.8% vs -3.7% |
| Risk Resilience | DD | Risk Resilience 41 vs 78 |
| Analyst expectations | CTVA | Target upside 414.8% vs -16.7% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CTVA and DD 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 10 points.
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Analyst targets on the leader are widely dispersed. (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 DD.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20DD lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 10 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- DD +10
- 42 vs 52
- 7 sessions ago
- DD +12
- 38 vs 50
- 30 sessions ago
- DD +8
- 44 vs 52
- 90 sessions ago
- DD +9
- 46 vs 55
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Aug 20 when CTVA moved ahead of DD.
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 / 4 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only CTVA
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (23.46%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only DD
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, Downtrend Structure Active.
DD 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 -1.4%, AIQ +1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.9%, AIQ +3 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.
- 1CTVA closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 37 points behind, the largest single contributor to DD's edge.
- 2CTVA's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3DD'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
CTVA leads on balance| Metric | CTVA | DD |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 30.1% | 8.2% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 61.7% | -9.4% |
| Gross margin | 48.5% | 34.4% |
| Operating margin | 17.1% | 14.7% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 4.1% | 0.3% |
| Debt to equity | 0.19 | 0.23 |
Performance
DD leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | CTVA | DD |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -3.4% | 2.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -83.9% | 0.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -85.4% | -4.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -83.9% | -5.1% |
| Year to date | -80.8% | 10.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -78.9% | 35.6% |
Technicals
DD has the stronger structure| Metric | CTVA | DD |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 4.2 | 57.1 |
| ADX (14) | 55.1 | 12.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | -79.6% | 0.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | -82.8% | -3.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | — | 20.3% |
Risk
DD is the more resilient| Metric | CTVA | DD |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.05 | 1.08 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.65 | 0.97 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.46 | 1.82 |
| Max drawdown | -86.8% | -19.6% |
| Current drawdown | -85.8% | -14% |
| Annualized volatility | 89.1% | 30.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.6% | -2.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CTVA or DD?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, DD is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 52 against CTVA's 42. The edge comes from risk resilience and momentum. CTVA is not without a case — it holds the better quality 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 CTVA or DD the better buy right now?
DD carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 4 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor DD over CTVA?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. DD leads Risk Resilience by 37 points; DD leads Momentum by 25 points; CTVA leads Quality by 11 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CTVA or DD?
Analyst price targets imply +414.8% upside for CTVA and -16.7% for DD, so the Street currently favors CTVA. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors DD. 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, CTVA or DD?
DD is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. DD on the peer-relative Value factor, by 4 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, CTVA or DD?
CTVA 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, CTVA or DD?
DD on the Momentum factor, by 25 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, CTVA or DD?
DD is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. DD on Risk Resilience, by 37 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 CTVA more profitable than DD?
CTVA leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 48.5% vs 34.4%; operating margin 17.1% vs 14.7%; ttm roe 4.1% vs 0.3%.
Is DD's lead over CTVA getting stronger or weaker?
DD lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 10 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 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-08-20, when CTVA moved ahead of DD.
What would change the CTVA vs DD verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CTVA closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 37 points behind, the largest single contributor to DD's edge; CTVA's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; DD'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 CTVA and DD?
CTVA: 1 bullish / 4 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. DD: 1 bullish / 2 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 CTVA is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On DD it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare CTVA and DD 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.