DBRG vs WLDN Stock Comparison
Compare DBRG and WLDN across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between DBRG and WLDN?
DBRG leads the current stock comparison as DigitalBridge Group, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
DigitalBridge Group, Inc. vs Willdan Group, Inc.
DBRG leads
DBRG leads by 9 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 4 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors WLDN on target upside.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support DBRG, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
DigitalBridge Group, Inc.
Willdan Group, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors DBRG over WLDN, 67 versus 58 as of Sep 11, 2026. DBRG's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and momentum, while WLDN holds the stronger value profile. DBRG also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors WLDN. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor DBRG today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. DBRG lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 9 points over 30 sessions.
Compare DigitalBridge Group, Inc. and Willdan Group, Inc. 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 DBRG and WLDN 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 Resilience87 vs 57DBRG +30
- Momentum63 vs 43DBRG +20
- Value53 vs 66WLDN +13
- Quality74 vs 64DBRG +10
3 of 6 evidence groups favor DBRG. DBRG’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and momentum; WLDN 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 +1
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum -4
No new signals fired.
DBRG's lead widened by 1 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — DBRG and WLDN both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
DBRG (DigitalBridge Group, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and momentum.
WLDN (Willdan Group, Inc.): the counter-case, on value, fundamentals, valuation — but at materially higher volatility, 30.8% against 2.3%.
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
DBRGDBRG on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
WLDNWLDN on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
WLDNWLDN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 13 points.
Momentum
DBRGDBRG on the Momentum factor, by 20 points.
Lower downside
DBRGDBRG on Risk Resilience, by 30 points.
Analyst upside
WLDNWLDN on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors DBRG, analyst targets favor WLDN. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | DBRG | WLDN | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +0.6% | +33.8% | WLDN has more room |
| Target dispersion | 0% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Buy | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 1 | 1 | 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
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor DBRG. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | DBRG | 67 vs 58 |
| Fundamentals | WLDNon balance | revenue growth 3.3% vs 48.9%; EPS growth 18.3% vs 179.3%; TTM ROE 16% vs 20.9%; gross margin 95.7% vs 37.8%; operating margin 54.4% vs 7.1% — WLDN takes 3 of 5 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | WLDN | Value 53 vs 66 |
| Technicals | DBRG | Price vs 50-day 0.2% vs 3.8%; vs 200-day 4.9% vs -11.5% |
| Risk Resilience | DBRG | Risk Resilience 87 vs 57 |
| Analyst expectations | WLDN | Target upside 0.6% vs 33.8% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of DBRG and WLDN 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.
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 DBRG.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10DBRG lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 9 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- DBRG +9
- 67 vs 58
- 7 sessions ago
- DBRG +3
- 67 vs 64
- 30 sessions ago
- DBRG +4
- 70 vs 66
- 90 sessions ago
- DBRG +16
- 68 vs 52
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Jun 9 when DBRG moved ahead of WLDN.
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.
4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (4.30%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (0.3%)
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (16.93%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
DBRG 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.13%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.33%, AIQ -1 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.
- 1WLDN closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to DBRG's edge.
- 2WLDN's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3DBRG's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 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
WLDN leads on balance| Metric | DBRG | WLDN |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 3.3% | 48.9% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 18.3% | 179.3% |
| Gross margin | 95.7% | 37.8% |
| Operating margin | 54.4% | 7.1% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 16% | 20.9% |
| Debt to equity | 0.14 | 0.25 |
Performance
DBRG leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | DBRG | WLDN |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.3% | -6.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.1% | -3.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 1.5% | -15.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 3.5% | -2.4% |
| Year to date | 3.8% | -21% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 39.6% | -16.1% |
Technicals
DBRG has the stronger structure| Metric | DBRG | WLDN |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 52 | 38.6 |
| ADX (14) | 20.3 | 22.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | 0.2% | 3.8% |
| Price vs 200-day | 4.9% | -11.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 2.3% | 30.8% |
Risk
DBRG is the more resilient| Metric | DBRG | WLDN |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.62 | 1.71 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.79 | 0.01 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.87 | 0.01 |
| Max drawdown | -33.7% | -50.4% |
| Current drawdown | -0.4% | -39.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 56% | 61.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.5% | -4.7% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, DBRG or WLDN?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, DBRG is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 67 against WLDN's 58. The edge comes from risk resilience and momentum. WLDN 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 DBRG or WLDN the better buy right now?
DBRG carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor DBRG over WLDN?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. DBRG leads Risk Resilience by 30 points; DBRG leads Momentum by 20 points; WLDN leads Value by 13 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, DBRG or WLDN?
Analyst price targets imply +0.6% upside for DBRG and +33.8% for WLDN, so the Street currently favors WLDN. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors DBRG. 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, DBRG or WLDN?
WLDN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. WLDN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 13 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, DBRG or WLDN?
WLDN 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, DBRG or WLDN?
DBRG on the Momentum factor, by 20 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, DBRG or WLDN?
DBRG is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. DBRG on Risk Resilience, by 30 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 DBRG more profitable than WLDN?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 95.7% vs 37.8%; operating margin 54.4% vs 7.1%; ttm roe 16% vs 20.9%. DBRG leads on two measures and WLDN on one measure, 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 DBRG's lead over WLDN getting stronger or weaker?
DBRG lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 4 to 9 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 2 times in that window, most recently on 2026-06-09, when DBRG moved ahead of WLDN.
What would change the DBRG vs WLDN verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: WLDN closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to DBRG's edge; WLDN's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; DBRG's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 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 DBRG and WLDN?
DBRG: 4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. WLDN: 1 bullish / 2 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 DBRG is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On WLDN it is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare DBRG and WLDN 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.