DEI vs HPP Stock Comparison
DEI currently leads HPP in this stock comparison, with AIQ scores of 46 vs 36. The clearest difference is risk resilience.
What is the main difference between DEI and HPP?
DEI leads the current stock comparison as Douglas Emmett, Inc., with the clearest separation coming from risk resilience and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Douglas Emmett, Inc. vs Hudson Pacific Properties, Inc.
DEI leads
DEI leads by 10 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 1 points over 30 sessions. Wall Street currently favors HPP on target upside.
Competitive: 4 of 6 evidence groups support DEI, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Douglas Emmett, Inc.
Hudson Pacific Properties, Inc.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors DEI over HPP, 46 versus 36 as of Oct 21, 2026. DEI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and momentum. DEI also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average, though analyst target upside currently favors HPP. 4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor DEI today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. DEI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 10 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Douglas Emmett, Inc. and Hudson Pacific Properties, 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 DEI and HPP 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 Resilience54 vs 22DEI +32
- Momentum42 vs 25DEI +17
- Quality28 vs 23DEI +5
- Value64 vs 65Even
4 of 6 evidence groups favor DEI. DEI’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and momentum.
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 +3
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.
DEI's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — DEI and HPP both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
DEI (Douglas Emmett, Inc.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and momentum.
HPP (Hudson Pacific Properties, Inc.): the counter-case, on analyst expectations — but at materially higher volatility, 69.7% against 35.7%.
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
DEIDEI on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
DEIDEI on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
DEIDEI on the Momentum factor, by 17 points.
Lower downside
DEIDEI on Risk Resilience, by 32 points.
Analyst upside
HPPHPP on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
The model and the Street disagree here: AIQ favors DEI, analyst targets favor HPP. That disagreement is the most useful thing on this page.
| Measure | DEI | HPP | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +36.4% | +57.5% | HPP has more room |
| Target dispersion | +15.4% | +60.4% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Hold | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 2 | 7 | 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
4 of 6 covered evidence groups favor DEI. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | DEI | 46 vs 36 |
| Fundamentals | DEIon balance | revenue growth 2.2% vs 3.5%; EPS growth -7.4% vs -97.6%; TTM ROE -1.2% vs -18.6%; gross margin 63.2% vs 29.5% — DEI takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | Even | Value 64 vs 65 |
| Technicals | DEI | Price vs 50-day -10.5% vs -23.5%; vs 200-day -12.3% vs -12.8% |
| Risk Resilience | DEI | Risk Resilience 54 vs 22 |
| Analyst expectations | HPP | Target upside 36.4% vs 57.5% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of DEI and HPP 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 10 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 DEI.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20DEI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 10 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- DEI +10
- 46 vs 36
- 7 sessions ago
- DEI +5
- 45 vs 40
- 30 sessions ago
- DEI +1
- 43 vs 42
- 90 sessions ago
- DEI +5
- 46 vs 41
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Jul 9 when DEI moved ahead of HPP.
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 / 2 bearish, conflicted
Only DEI
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (2.63%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only HPP
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (13.75%)
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (7.49%)
- BB Lower Band Breach — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
DEI 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 -0.52%, AIQ +1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.21%, 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.
- 1HPP closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 32 points behind, the largest single contributor to DEI's edge.
- 2HPP's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3DEI'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
DEI leads on balance| Metric | DEI | HPP |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 2.2% | 3.5% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | -7.4% | -97.6% |
| Gross margin | 63.2% | 29.5% |
| Operating margin | 19% | -0.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | -1.2% | -18.6% |
| Debt to equity | 3.12 | 1.33 |
Performance
DEI leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | DEI | HPP |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.5% | -22% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -7.6% | -21.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -20.5% | -34.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -10.4% | 13.8% |
| Year to date | -12.8% | -12.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -29.1% | -48.3% |
Technicals
DEI has the stronger structure| Metric | DEI | HPP |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 50 | 31.3 |
| ADX (14) | 37.6 | 30.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | -10.5% | -23.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | -12.3% | -12.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 35.7% | 69.7% |
Risk
DEI is the more resilient| Metric | DEI | HPP |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.64 | 1.24 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.09 | -0.62 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.76 | -1.04 |
| Max drawdown | -32.3% | -69.6% |
| Current drawdown | -29.4% | -47.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 30.2% | 70.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -3.1% | -6.9% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, DEI or HPP?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, DEI is the stronger of the two as of Oct 21, 2026, scoring 46 against HPP's 36. The edge comes from risk resilience and momentum. 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 DEI or HPP the better buy right now?
DEI carries the stronger systematic profile as of Oct 21, 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 DEI over HPP?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. DEI leads Risk Resilience by 32 points; DEI leads Momentum by 17 points; DEI leads Quality by 5 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, DEI or HPP?
Analyst price targets imply +36.4% upside for DEI and +57.5% for HPP, so the Street currently favors HPP. That points the opposite way to the AIQ Score, which favors DEI. 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, DEI or HPP?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. 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, DEI or HPP?
DEI 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, DEI or HPP?
DEI on the Momentum factor, by 17 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, DEI or HPP?
DEI is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. DEI on Risk Resilience, by 32 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 DEI more profitable than HPP?
DEI leads on the comparable margin measures — gross margin 63.2% vs 29.5%; operating margin 19% vs -0.3%; ttm roe -1.2% vs -18.6%.
Is DEI's lead over HPP getting stronger or weaker?
DEI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 1 to 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 2026-07-09, when DEI moved ahead of HPP.
What would change the DEI vs HPP verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: HPP closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 32 points behind, the largest single contributor to DEI's edge; HPP's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; DEI'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 DEI and HPP?
DEI: 1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted. HPP: 2 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 DEI is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon). On HPP it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare DEI and HPP 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.