CVS vs UNH Stock Comparison
UNH currently leads CVS in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 63 vs 58. The clearest difference is quality, while CVS has the stronger value profile.
What is the main difference between CVS and UNH?
UNH leads the current stock comparison as UnitedHealth Group Incorporated, with the clearest separation coming from quality and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
CVS Health Corp. vs UnitedHealth Group Incorporated
UNH leads
UNH leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum. Wall Street currently favors CVS on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support UNH, and its current signal state is conflicted.
CVS Health Corp.
UnitedHealth Group Incorporated
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors UNH over CVS, 63 versus 58 as of Oct 21, 2026. UNH's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while CVS holds the stronger value profile. UNH also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors CVS. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor UNH today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. UNH lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 5 points over 30 sessions.
Compare CVS Health Corp. and UnitedHealth Group Incorporated 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 CVS and UNH 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.
- Quality28 vs 46UNH +18
- Momentum82 vs 95UNH +13
- Value70 vs 59CVS +11
- Risk Resilience52 vs 51Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor UNH. UNH’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; CVS keeps a meaningful value 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 +1
New signals
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
New signals
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
UNH's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — CVS and UNH both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
UNH (UnitedHealth Group Incorporated): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
CVS (CVS Health Corp.): the counter-case, on value, valuation, 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
UNHUNH on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
CVSCVS on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
CVSCVS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 points.
Momentum
UNHUNH on the Momentum factor, by 13 points.
Lower downside
UNHUNH carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
CVSCVS on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors UNH, analyst targets favor CVS. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | CVS | UNH | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +18.4% | +12.9% | CVS has more room |
| Target dispersion | +30.7% | +31.7% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 16 | 20 | 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 | CVS | UNH |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y dividend CAGR | 5.87% | 12.57% |
| 2020 regular DPS | $2.000 | $4.830 |
| 2025 regular DPS | $2.660 | $8.730 |
| Years increased | 3 | 5 |
| No cut in window | Yes | Yes |
| Cohort rank | #217 | #58 |
UNH grew its split-adjusted regular dividend faster over 2020–2025 — 12.57% a year against CVS's 5.87%. 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
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor UNH. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | UNH | 58 vs 63 |
| Fundamentals | UNH | TTM ROE 6.4% vs 16.1%; gross margin 14.2% vs 22.8%; operating margin 2% vs 5.3% |
| Valuation | CVS | Value 70 vs 59 |
| Technicals | UNH | Price vs 50-day 2% vs 7.6%; vs 200-day 7.3% vs 16.5% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 52 vs 51 |
| Analyst expectations | CVS | Target upside 18.4% vs 12.9% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of CVS and UNH 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 5 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 3 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 UNH.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20UNH lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 5 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- UNH +5
- 58 vs 63
- 7 sessions ago
- UNH +7
- 55 vs 62
- 30 sessions ago
- UNH +5
- 43 vs 48
- 90 sessions ago
- UNH +1
- 43 vs 44
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Sep 11 when CVS moved ahead of UNH.
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.
CVS and UNH carry the same 7 signals, so the signals do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, BB Upper Band Breach, Keltner Channel Breakout, RSI Overbought, EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish, Uptrend Structure Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
UNH 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 -1.37%, AIQ +1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.54%, 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.
- 1CVS closes the Quality gap — currently 18 points behind, the largest single contributor to UNH's edge.
- 2CVS's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3UNH's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 5 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
UNH leads on balance| Metric | CVS | UNH |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 5.6% | 0.6% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 0.9% | -24.6% |
| Gross margin | 14.2% | 22.8% |
| Operating margin | 2% | 5.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 6.4% | 16.1% |
| Debt to equity | 0.96 | 0.71 |
Performance
UNH leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | CVS | UNH |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 8.2% | 11% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 8.8% | 12.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -12.3% | -2.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 22.5% | 21.2% |
| Year to date | 19.4% | 27% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 16.4% | 17.5% |
Technicals
UNH has the stronger structure| Metric | CVS | UNH |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 79 | 80.8 |
| ADX (14) | 24.9 | 31.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | 2% | 7.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 7.3% | 16.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 28.8% | 27.3% |
Risk
Split| Metric | CVS | UNH |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.17 | 0.37 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.48 | 0.53 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.62 | 0.65 |
| Max drawdown | -23.1% | -29.6% |
| Current drawdown | -14.3% | -3.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 31.5% | 34.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.6% | -2.3% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, CVS or UNH?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, UNH is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 63 against CVS's 58. The edge comes from quality and momentum. CVS 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 CVS or UNH the better buy right now?
UNH carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor UNH over CVS?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. UNH leads Quality by 18 points; UNH leads Momentum by 13 points; CVS leads Value by 11 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, CVS or UNH?
Analyst price targets imply +18.4% upside for CVS and +12.9% for UNH, so the Street currently favors CVS. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors UNH. 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, CVS or UNH?
CVS is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. CVS on the peer-relative Value factor, by 11 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, CVS or UNH?
CVS 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, CVS or UNH?
UNH on the Momentum factor, by 13 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, CVS or UNH?
UNH is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. UNH 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 CVS more profitable than UNH?
UNH leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 14.2% vs 22.8%; operating margin 2% vs 5.3%; ttm roe 6.4% vs 16.1%.
Is UNH's lead over CVS getting stronger or weaker?
UNH lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 5 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 5 times in that window, most recently on 2026-09-11, when CVS moved ahead of UNH.
What would change the CVS vs UNH verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: CVS closes the Quality gap — currently 18 points behind, the largest single contributor to UNH's edge; CVS's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it; UNH's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 5 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 CVS and UNH?
CVS: 5 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. UNH: 5 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 CVS is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On UNH it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare CVS and UNH 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.